Preoperative biliary drainage for biliary tract and ampullary carcinomas

We posed six clinical questions (CQ) on preoperative biliary drainage and organized all pertinent evidence regarding these questions. CQ 1. Is preoperative biliary drainage necessary for patients with jaundice? The indications for preoperative drainage for jaundiced patients are changing greatly. Many reports state that, excluding conditions such as cholangitis and liver dysfunction, biliary drainage is not necessary before pancreatoduodenectomy or less invasive surgery. However, the morbidity and mortality of extended hepatectomy for biliary cancer is still high, and the most common cause of death is hepatic failure; therefore, preoperative biliary drainage is desirable in patients who are to undergo extended hepatectomy. CQ 2. What procedures are appropriate for preoperative biliary drainage? There are three methods of biliary drainage: percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD), endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) or endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage (ERBD), and surgical drainage. ERBD is an internal drainage method, and PTBD and ENBD are external methods. However, there are no reports of comparisons of preoperative biliary drainage methods using randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Thus, at this point, a method should be used that can be safely performed with the equipment and techniques available at each facility. CQ 3. Which is better, unilateral or bilateral biliary drainage, in malignant hilar obstruction? Unilateral biliary drainage of the future remnant hepatic lobe is usually enough even when intrahepatic bile ducts are separated into multiple units due to hilar malignancy. Bilateral biliary drainage should be considered in the following cases: those in which the operative procedure is difficult to determine before biliary drainage; those in which cholangitis has developed after unilateral drainage; and those in which the decrease in serum bilirubin after unilateral drainage is very slow. CQ 4. What is the best treatment for postdrainage fever? The most likely cause of high fever in patients with biliary drainage is cholangitis due to problems with the existing drainage catheter or segmental cholangitis if an undrained segment is left. In the latter case, urgent drainage is required. CQ 5. Is bile culture necessary in patients with biliary drainage who are to undergo surgery? Monitoring of bile cultures is necessary for patients with biliary drainage to determine the appropriate use of antibiotics during the perioperative period. CQ 6. Is bile replacement useful for patients with external biliary drainage? Maintenance of the enterohepatic bile circulation is vitally important. Thus, preoperative bile replacement in patients with external biliary drainage is very likely to be effective when highly invasive surgery (e.g., extended hepatectomy for hilar cholangiocarcinoma) is planned.     

胆汁引流时机对大鼠胆管阻塞性肝纤维化的影响

目的探讨胆管结扎肝纤维化大鼠模型胆管引流时机对纤维化的影响。方法大鼠胆管结扎肝纤维化模型,分别于早期（10 d）和晚期（20 d）引流,引流5 d后与模型对照,比较大体形态、肝组织学、肝组织转化生长因子（TGF）β1和基质金属蛋白酶组织抑制因子-1（TIMP-1）mRNA表达情况。结果与同期模型对照组比较,早期引流组大体形态上好转明显,肝组织学纤维面积百分比和纤维化程度半定量计分有明显改善（P〈0.001,P=0.003）,肝组织TGFβ1、TIMP-1 mRNA表达明显下降（P〈0.001,P〈0.001）,而晚期引流组与同期模型组对照差异无统计学意义。结论胆管阻塞时及时进行引流可以有效缓解肝纤维化,而引流开始较晚肝纤维化趋于稳定、单纯引流难以缓解。     

Pancreatobiliary drainage using the EUS-FNA technique: EUS-BD and EUS-PD

The recent progression of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) enables EUS-guided transmural drainage based on the EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy technique. Prior to the development of EUS-guided drainage procedures, the options for treating obstruction of the pancreatobiliary system included surgical drainage, percutaneous drainage using ultrasound and radiological guidance, and endoscopic (non EUS-guidance) transmural drainage. Today, using EUS guidance and dedicated accessories, it is possible to create bilio- or pancreato-digestive anastomosis, EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), and EUS-guided pancreatic drainage (EUS-PD). The recent literature describes that EUS-BD and EUS-PD have acceptable success and complication rates. These procedures are anticipated for use as alternatives to surgery or percutaneous drainage when endoscopic transpapillary procedures fail.     

Endoscopic approach to pancreatic pseudocysts: An American perspective

Pancreatic pseudocysts, abscesses, and walled-off pancreatic necrosis are types of pancreatic fluid collections that arise as a consequence of pancreatic injury. Pain, early satiety, biliary obstruction, and infection are all indications for drainage. Percutaneous-radiologic drainage, surgical drainage, and endoscopic drainage are the three traditional approaches to the drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts. The endoscopic approach to pancreatic pseudocysts has evolved over the past thirty years and endoscopists are often capable of draining these collections. In experienced centers endoscopic ultrasound-guided endoscopic drainage avoids complications related to percutaneous drainage and is less invasive than surgery.     

Predictive factors associated with prolonged chest drain production after esophagectomy

After esophagectomy, pleural drainage is performed to ensure complete drainage of the pleural cavities. The aim of this study was to detect predisposing factors for prolonged drainage. Patients who underwent transhiatal or extended transthoracic esophagectomy for adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction were included. Patients who underwent esophagectomy produced a median total drainage volume of 2477 mL (range 30-14,908). Seventy-five patients needed chest drainage = 7 days (short drainage) while 57 patients needed chest drainage > 7 days (prolonged drainage). Factors associated with prolonged drainage were a transthoracic approach (P < 0.001), a higher volume of blood loss (P = 0.027), a higher number of resected lymphnodes (P = 0.046) and a radical dissection (P = 0.033). Prolonged pleural drainage is associated with a transthoracic approach and is seen more often in patients after a microscopically radical dissection. Prolonged drainage is a sign of adequate dissection on the site of the primary tumor, probably due to the more extensive trauma to the lymphatic vessels in the mediastinum.     

Outcome of patients with acute, necrotizing pancreatitis requiring drainage-does drainage size matter？

AIM： To assess the outcome of patients with acute necrotizing pancreatitis treated by percutaneous drainage with special focus on the influence of drainage size and number.
METHODS： We performed a retrospective analysis of 80 patients with acute pancreatitis requiring percutaneous drainage therapy for infected necroses. Endpoints were mortality and length of hospital stay. The influence of drainage characteristics such as the median drainage size, the largest drainage size per patient and the total drainage plane per patient on patient outcome was evaluated.
RESULTS： Total hospital survival was 66%. Thirty-four patients out of all 80 patients （43%） survived acute necrotizing pancreatitis with percutaneous drainage therapy only. Eighteen patients out of all 80 patients needed additional percutaneous necrosectomy （23%）. Ten out of these patients required surgical necrosectomy in addition, 6 patients received open necrosectomy without prior percutaneous necrosectomy. Elective surgery was performed in 3 patients receiving cholecystectomy and one patient receiving resection of the parathyroid gland. The number of drainages ranged from one to fourteen per patient. The drainage diameter ranged from 8 French catheters to 24 French catheters. The median drainage size as well as the largest drainage size used per patient and the total drainage area used per patient did not show statistically significant influence on mortality.
CONCLUSION： Percutaneous drainage therapy is an effective tool for treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis.Large bore drainages did not prove to be more effective in controlling the septic focus.     

Conversion from external nasobiliary drainage to internal drainage using endoscopically available scissor forceps

Endoscopic nasobiliary drainage may cause undue stress, such as pharyngeal discomfort. We converted external drainage to internal drainage by cutting the external drainage tube with endoscopically available scissor forceps. Endoscopic nasobiliary drainage tubes were cut in the vicinity of the papilla using scissor forceps in 4 patients. The drainage tube was successfully cut in all patients. The tube was left for short-term internal drainage in 3 patients until the operation or endoscopic treatment was performed. The remaining patient with pancreatic head cancer was followed as an outpatient and the tube stent was occluded 62 days after cutting. Although further studies using a larger number of patients are needed, our procedure is thought to be beneficial to patients undergoing endoscopic nasobiliary drainage.     

A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Preoperative Biliary Stenting on Patients With Obstructive Jaundice

The goal of this study was to systematically review the effects of biliary stenting on postoperative morbidity and mortality of patients with obstructive jaundice. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and other relevant databases were searched by computer and manually for published and unpublished studies on the impact of preoperative biliary drainage on patients with obstructive jaundice from 2000 to the present day. Two investigators independently selected the studies according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted the data, and assessed the quality of the selected studies. Meta-analysis was performed to compare postoperative morbidity and mortality of patients between the drainage and nondrainage groups.Compared with the nondrainage group, the overall mortality, overall morbidity, infectious morbidity, incidence of wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, pancreatic fistulas, bile leak, and delayed gastric emptying in the drainage group were not significantly different. Compared with the nondrainage group, the drainage group had a drainage time of <4 weeks with an increased overall morbidity by 7% to 23%; however, the overall morbidity of the drainage group with a drainage time >4 weeks was not significantly different. Compared with the nondrainage group, the overall mortality of the drainage group using metal stents and plastic stents as internal drainage devices was reduced by 0.5% to 6%, whereas that of the drainage group using plastic stent devices was not significantly different.In summary, preoperative drainage should be applied selectively. The drainage time should be >4 weeks, and metal stents should be used for internal drainage.     

引流管固定装置ELOCK用于胸腔引流管固定的临床效果研究

目的探讨胸腔引流管的固定方法,提供安全有效的固定选择。方法选择胸腔闭式引流术放置单侧胸腔引流管的患者98例,采用计算机随机分组分为研究组(49例)和对照组(49例)。研究组采用缝线联合引流管固定装置ELOCK固定引流管,对照组采用缝合固定引流管,引流管穿出皮肤处用纱布包扎。比较两组的引流管脱落、位移、引流管堵塞、牵拉痛次数、皮肤不良反应、增加费用。结果研究组患者的引流管脱落率、位移和牵拉痛次数均低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05),研究组的费用增加高于对照组(P0.05),两组患者的皮肤不良反应比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论采用引流管固定装置ELOCK固定胸腔引流管,可安全有效的固定引流管。     

Comparison of clinical utility between digital and analog drainage systems in patients with spontaneous pneumothorax

BackgroundDigital drainage systems can continuously and numerically monitor air leakage, which may lead to a shorter duration of drainage and hospitalization; however, the usefulness of digital drainage systems compared to that of analog drainage systems for patients with primary or secondary spontaneous pneumothorax remains unclear.MethodsThis retrospective study included 108 patients with spontaneous pneumothorax who were successfully treated with chest drainage alone at our institution. We compared the clinical efficacy of digital and analog chest drainage systems.ResultsFrom the study population, 68 patients were diagnosed with primary and the other 40 with secondary spontaneous pneumothorax. The analog drainage system was used in 44 patients, and the digital drainage system in 64 patients. Among patients with primary spontaneous pneumothorax, the digital group had a significantly shorter duration of chest drainage than the analog group (median 2 vs. 4 days; p = 0.001), but there was no significant difference in those with secondary spontaneous pneumothorax. Additionally, the length and cost of hospitalization in the digital group were significantly lower than those in the analog group for both patients with primary and secondary spontaneous pneumothorax. There was no significant difference in recurrence within 1 week after chest tube removal between the two groups, neither among patients with primary nor among those with secondary pneumothorax.ConclusionsDigital drainage system may be better than analog drainage system for patients with primary spontaneous pneumothorax who need chest drainage, but further research is needed on drainage system selection for those with secondary disease.     

Indirect biliary drainage as an alternative solution for biloma due to complicated biliary drainage

Pancreas cancer has increased morbidity and mortality. It generally result in biliary obstruction which life threatening importance. Main biliary drainage method is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. When endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is not successful, second preferred method is percutaneous biliary drainage. Percutaneous biliary drainage has some complications which is an invasive procedure. A complication of percutaneous biliary drainage due to patient iatrogenity which was not ever reported in the literature biliary drainage according to our literature research. In these circumstances an alternative solution is indirect biliary drainage.     

微创锥颅置管引流术中硬通道与脑动脉血管网关系的探讨

目的 探讨应用硬通道微创锥颅置管术治疗脑出血时，穿刺路径与脑动脉血管网构筑的关系。方法 本研究对2012年4月至2014年3月在福建省晋江市医院神经内科住院的60例脑出血患者行简易立体定向电驱动锥颅置管术治疗，术后待血肿引流量＞90%后，拔管前行脑血管造影成像（CTA），以了解穿刺针及血肿穿刺路径与脑动脉血管网构筑的关系。结果 对所有脑出血患者在微创锥颅置管术后CTA分析发现，穿刺针在穿刺血肿靶点的路径中均可安全滑过相关颅脑动脉，标点穿刺针位置准确；未见置管及引流过程中穿刺针明显损伤，相关重要脑动脉血管引流效果好。患者术后恢复快，预后良好率达到61.67%。结论 硬通道微创锥颅置管术及术后引流过程中，穿刺针不易损伤脑动脉血管网，穿刺路径较安全可靠。     

Is constant negative pressure for external drainage of the main pancreatic duct useful in preventing pancreatic fistula following pancreatoduodenectomy?

BackgroundThis study sought to investigate the utility of constant negative pressure for external drainage of the main pancreatic duct in preventing postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy.MethodsOnly patients with soft pancreas were included. In the former period (July 2013 to May 2015), gravity dependent drainage was applied (gravity dependent drainage group), and in the latter period (June 2015 to November 2016), constant negative pressure drainage (negative pressure drainage group) was applied to the main pancreatic duct stent.ResultsThere were 37 patients in the gravity dependent drainage group and 39 patients in the negative pressure drainage group. Clinically relevant POPF occurred in 21 patients (56.8%) in the gravity dependent drainage group and 13 patients (33.3%) in the negative pressure drainage group (p = 0.040). The incidence rate of major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade > III) was significantly lower in the negative pressure drainage group (13.2%) compared to the gravity dependent drainage group (48.7%) (p = 0.001). In-hospital stay was also significantly shorter in the negative pressure drainage group compared to the gravity dependent drainage group (median 25 vs. 33 days, p = 0.024). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the gravity dependent drainage was one of the independent risk factors for the incidence of POPF (odds ratio, 3.33; p = 0.032).ConclusionsIn patients with soft pancreas, the incidence rate of clinically relevant POPF may be reduced by applying constant negative pressure to the pancreatic duct stent. It also has a potential to reduce overall incidence of major complications and shorten in-hospital stay after pancreatoduodenectomy.     

腹腔镜胆囊切除术后腹腔引流的效果评价

目的通过对进行了腹腔镜胆囊切除术（LC）的患者做回顾性分析,以评估常规预防性放置腹腔引流管的临床效益。方法将2009年3月至2011年8月进行了非复杂性LC的295例胆囊结石或胆囊息肉患者随机分为非引流组和引流组。非引流组中150例患者未接受常规预防性腹腔引流,引流组中145例患者均进行常规预防性腹腔引流。结果非引流组患者第一次排气时间和术后住院天数均较引流组患者短。术后并发症的发生率在两组之间差异无统计学意义。在本研究中未发现由于缺乏腹腔引流而发生的并发症。结论通过判断,对于合适的患者在简单的LC后不进行腹腔引流是安全可靠的。     

中心静脉导管行胸腔闭式引流治疗气胸的临床观察

目的比较中心静脉导管与粗硅胶引流管行胸腔闭式引流治疗气胸的疗效和并发症。方法我科收治的116例气胸患者随机分为研究组（58例）和对照组（58例）,研究组采用中心静脉导管行胸腔闭式引流,对照组采用粗硅胶引流管行胸腔闭式引流,观察两组的治疗效果和并发症。结果研究组和对照组相比,治疗效果接近,差异无统计学意义。但在某些并发症上,研究组较对照组明显减少,差异有统计学意义。结论采用中心静脉导管行胸腔闭式引流治疗气胸创伤小、操作简单、引流效果可靠、并发症少,值得临床推广。     

胸腔闭式引流术后感染患者病原菌分布、危险因素分析及干预措施研究

目的分析胸腔闭式引流术后感染患者病原菌分布特征以及感染危险因素,探讨预防术后感染的措施。方法回顾性选择2014年6月至2018年12月于我院行胸腔闭式引流术的362例患者临床资料,根据是否发生术后感染,将患者分为感染组和未感染组。统计术后感染患者病原菌分布情况,Logistic回归分析胸腔闭式引流术后感染的危险因素,总结预防感染的有效措施。结果本组术后感染32例,感染率8.84%,感染病原菌以细菌(59.38%)为主,65.63%为多重病原菌感染。G-菌株和G+菌株分别以肺炎克雷伯菌(20.00%)和金黄色葡萄球菌(14.55%)检出率最高。单因素分析,年龄、自发性气胸、合并糖尿病、低蛋白血症、慢性阻塞性肺疾病、有创机械通气、引流管留置时间、引流管个数、引流瓶液体、引流口敷料更换时间、围术期抗生素使用时间、联合应用抗生素与胸腔闭式引流术后感染有关(P<0.05),Logistic回归分析示年龄≥65岁(OR=1.857,95%CI 1.032~5.172)、合并糖尿病(OR=2.232,95%CI 1.354~6.275)、合并慢性阻塞性肺疾病(OR=2.036,95%CI 1.245~6.029)、有创机械通气(OR=2.547,95%CI 1.524~8.569)、引流管留置时间≥72h(OR=3.028,95%CI 1.842~12.347)是胸腔闭式引流术后感染的高危因素(P<0.05)。结论胸腔闭式引流术后感染率较高,高龄、合并糖尿病和慢性阻塞性肺疾病、有创机械通气以及长时间留置引流管,是导致感染的危险因素,临床加强对胸腔闭式引流患者感染监测,合理使用抗生素,做好引流管护理,以降低感染率。     

Three cases of pancreatic pseudocyst treated with transpapillary endoscopic management of pancreatic duct disruption after percutaneous drainage as a first-line treatment]

Previously reported series suggested that the morbidity rate of internal surgical drainage procedure alone was about 15% and the mortality rate was less than 5% in patients with pancreatic pseudocysts. Recently, ultrasonography or CT-guided percutaneous drainage and endoscopic drainage techniques have created a new dimension of invasive, non-surgical treatment options for these patients. In the absence of prospective, randomized, controlled studies comparing outcomes of different pseudocysts drainage techniques, the decision as to which method should be employed often lies with local expertise and enthusiasm. In our experience, radiologic percutaneous drainage with subsequent transpapillary endoscopic drainage had a high success rate and was relatively less difficult which resulted in rapid clinical improvement. We report three cases of pancreatic pseudocysts treated with percutaneous drainage as a first-line treatment followed by endoscopic treatment.     

Techniques of biliary drainage for acute cholangitis: Tokyo Guidelines

Biliary decompression and drainage done in a timely manner is the cornerstone of acute cholangitis treatment. The mortality rate of acute cholangitis was extremely high when no interventional procedures, other than open drainage, were available. At present, endoscopic drainage is the procedure of first choice, in view of its safety and effectiveness. In patients with severe (grade III) disease, defined according to the severity assessment criteria in the Guidelines, biliary drainage should be done promptly with respiration management, while patients with moderate (grade II) disease also need to undergo drainage promptly with close monitoring of their responses to the primary care. For endoscopic drainage, endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) or stent placement procedures are performed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported no difference in the drainage effect of these two procedures, but case-series studies have indicated the frequent occurrence of hemorrhage associated with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), and complications such as pancreatitis. Although the usefulness of percutaneous transhepatic drainage is supported by the case-series studies, its lower success rate and higher complication rates makes it a second-option procedure.     

Abdominalvs. Perineal drainage in rectal surgery

The efficiency of abdominal contra perineal drainage of the pelvic cavity after abdominoperineal resection for carcinoma of the rectum was evaluated retrospectively with regard to the frequency of perineal wound sepsis and length of hospital stay. Thirty-two (45 percent) of 71 patients with perineal drainage developed perineal wound sepsis, compared with four (12 percent) of 32 patients with abdominal drainage (P<0.01). Patients with perineal drainage stayed longer in the hospital (mean, 33 days) than those with abdominal drainage (mean, 24 days) (P<0.004). Furthermore, postoperative recovery was more comfortable in patients with abdominal drainage. Abdominal drainage therefore is recommended after abdominoperineal resection.     

中脑周围蛛网膜下腔出血的静脉引流方式

目的探讨脑内不同深静脉引流方式与中脑周围蛛网膜下腔出血(PMSAH)的关系方法回顾性分析2014年1月至2017年1月安徽医科大学第二附属医院诊治的90例蛛网膜下腔出血(SAH)患者的临床资料。其中PMSAH 30例为PMSAH组,动脉瘤性SAH 60例为对照组。单侧大脑半球静脉引流分为A型(正常的连续):基底静脉有大脑深中静脉引流,引流入Galen大脑大静脉;B型(正常的不连续):基底静脉与前方的钩静脉、后方的Galen静脉有不连续静脉引流;C型(原始的变异):未向Galen大脑大静脉引流,中脑周围静脉向岩上窦引流,或基底静脉直接引流入横窦、直窦。双侧大脑半球静脉引流的不同组合分为:正常型引流(Ⅰ型:AA),不连续型引流(Ⅱ型:AB、BB),原始型引流(Ⅲ型:AC、BC、CC),比较两组静脉引流方式的差异。结果 PMSAH组中,Ⅰ、Ⅱ型引流均占26.7%(各8例),Ⅲ型引流占46.7%(14例)。对照组中Ⅰ型引流占48.3%(29例),Ⅱ型引流占28.3%(17例),Ⅲ型引流占23.3%(14例)。3种静脉引流方式在两组中分布比较,差异无统计学意义(χ~2=5.804,P=0.055),但Ⅲ型静脉引流(46.7%比23.3%)在两组间差异有统计学意义(χ~2=5.081,P=0.024)。结论 PMSAH患者的深静脉引流多表现为基底静脉引流入硬脑膜静脉窦,而并非向大脑大静脉引流。提示原始引流入硬膜窦的方式较引流入大脑大静脉的方式更容易破裂。