“难治性”胆总管结石患者常规内镜结石清除失败的重要因素:单中心经验。

Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy Pub Date : 2014-01-01 Epub Date: 2014-09-30 DOI:10.1155/2014/861689
Emmanuel Christoforidis, Konstantinos Vasiliadis, Konstantinos Tsalis, Dimitrios Patridas, Konstantinos Blouhos, Manousos-Georgios Pramateftakis, Moysis Moysidis, Charalampos Lazaridis
{"title":"“难治性”胆总管结石患者常规内镜结石清除失败的重要因素:单中心经验。","authors":"Emmanuel Christoforidis,&nbsp;Konstantinos Vasiliadis,&nbsp;Konstantinos Tsalis,&nbsp;Dimitrios Patridas,&nbsp;Konstantinos Blouhos,&nbsp;Manousos-Georgios Pramateftakis,&nbsp;Moysis Moysidis,&nbsp;Charalampos Lazaridis","doi":"10.1155/2014/861689","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The objective of this study is to retrospectively evaluate factors significantly contributing to a failed stone extraction (SE) in patients with difficult to extract bile duct stones (BDS). Patients and Methods. During a 10-year period 1390 patients with BDS underwent successfully endoscopic sphincterotomy. Endoscopic SE was graded as easy; relatively easy; difficult; and failed. Difficult SE was encountered in 221 patients while failed SE was encountered in 205. A retrospective analysis of the criteria governing the difficulty of endoscopic SE following the index endoscopic intervention was performed to evaluate their significance in determining failure of complete SE among patients with difficult to extract bile duct stones. Results. Age ≥ 85 years, periampullary diverticula, multiple CBD stones (>4), and diameter of CBD stones (≥15 mm) were all significant contributing factors to a failed SE in univariate statistical tests. In the definitive multivariate analysis age, multiple stones and diameter of stones were found to be the significant, independent contributors. Conclusion. Failed conventional endoscopic stone clearance in patients with difficult to extract BDS is more likely to occur in overage patients, in patients with multiple CBD stones >4, and in patients with CBD stone(s) diameter ≥15 mm. </p>","PeriodicalId":11288,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy","volume":"2014 ","pages":"861689"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2014/861689","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Factors significantly contributing to a failed conventional endoscopic stone clearance in patients with \\\"difficult\\\" choledecholithiasis: a single-center experience.\",\"authors\":\"Emmanuel Christoforidis,&nbsp;Konstantinos Vasiliadis,&nbsp;Konstantinos Tsalis,&nbsp;Dimitrios Patridas,&nbsp;Konstantinos Blouhos,&nbsp;Manousos-Georgios Pramateftakis,&nbsp;Moysis Moysidis,&nbsp;Charalampos Lazaridis\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2014/861689\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The objective of this study is to retrospectively evaluate factors significantly contributing to a failed stone extraction (SE) in patients with difficult to extract bile duct stones (BDS). Patients and Methods. During a 10-year period 1390 patients with BDS underwent successfully endoscopic sphincterotomy. Endoscopic SE was graded as easy; relatively easy; difficult; and failed. Difficult SE was encountered in 221 patients while failed SE was encountered in 205. A retrospective analysis of the criteria governing the difficulty of endoscopic SE following the index endoscopic intervention was performed to evaluate their significance in determining failure of complete SE among patients with difficult to extract bile duct stones. Results. Age ≥ 85 years, periampullary diverticula, multiple CBD stones (>4), and diameter of CBD stones (≥15 mm) were all significant contributing factors to a failed SE in univariate statistical tests. In the definitive multivariate analysis age, multiple stones and diameter of stones were found to be the significant, independent contributors. Conclusion. Failed conventional endoscopic stone clearance in patients with difficult to extract BDS is more likely to occur in overage patients, in patients with multiple CBD stones >4, and in patients with CBD stone(s) diameter ≥15 mm. </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11288,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy\",\"volume\":\"2014 \",\"pages\":\"861689\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2014/861689\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/861689\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2014/9/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/861689","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2014/9/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

本研究的目的是回顾性评估导致胆管结石难以取出(BDS)患者结石取出失败的因素。患者和方法。在10年期间,1390例BDS患者成功接受了内镜下括约肌切开术。内镜下SE分级为易级;相对容易;困难的;,但都以失败告终。困难性SE 221例,失败性SE 205例。回顾性分析了内镜干预后内镜下SE困难的标准,以评估其在确定难以取出胆管结石患者完全SE失败中的意义。结果。在单变量统计检验中,年龄≥85岁、壶腹周围憩室、多发CBD结石(>4)、CBD结石直径(≥15 mm)均是导致SE失败的显著因素。在确定的多变量分析年龄,多个结石和结石直径被发现是显著的,独立的贡献者。结论。常规内镜下结石清除失败在难以取出BDS的患者中更容易发生在年龄较大的患者、多发性CBD结石>4的患者和CBD结石直径≥15 mm的患者中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Factors significantly contributing to a failed conventional endoscopic stone clearance in patients with "difficult" choledecholithiasis: a single-center experience.

The objective of this study is to retrospectively evaluate factors significantly contributing to a failed stone extraction (SE) in patients with difficult to extract bile duct stones (BDS). Patients and Methods. During a 10-year period 1390 patients with BDS underwent successfully endoscopic sphincterotomy. Endoscopic SE was graded as easy; relatively easy; difficult; and failed. Difficult SE was encountered in 221 patients while failed SE was encountered in 205. A retrospective analysis of the criteria governing the difficulty of endoscopic SE following the index endoscopic intervention was performed to evaluate their significance in determining failure of complete SE among patients with difficult to extract bile duct stones. Results. Age ≥ 85 years, periampullary diverticula, multiple CBD stones (>4), and diameter of CBD stones (≥15 mm) were all significant contributing factors to a failed SE in univariate statistical tests. In the definitive multivariate analysis age, multiple stones and diameter of stones were found to be the significant, independent contributors. Conclusion. Failed conventional endoscopic stone clearance in patients with difficult to extract BDS is more likely to occur in overage patients, in patients with multiple CBD stones >4, and in patients with CBD stone(s) diameter ≥15 mm.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Retracted: Comparison of Two Entry Methods for Laparoscopic Port Entry: Technical Point of View Endoscopic Ultrasound Elastography for Evaluation of Lymph Nodes: A Single Center Experience. Unsuspected Small-Bowel Crohn's Disease in Elderly Patients Diagnosed by Video Capsule Endoscopy. Use of 4-Fr versus 6-Fr Nasobiliary Catheter for Biliary Drainage: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Study. Comparison of the Diagnostic Yield of EUS Needles for Liver Biopsy: Ex Vivo Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1