经皮穿刺置管引流治疗急性重症胰腺炎合并胰腺周围组织坏死感染的效果观察

目的:探讨经皮穿刺置管引流术(PCD)治疗急性重症胰腺炎(SAP)胰腺周围组织坏死感染的临床效果。方法:回顾性分析对113例手术治疗的SAP合并胰腺周围组织坏死感染(胰腺坏死范围30%)患者资料,其中采用PCD治疗54例(PCD组),采取直接开腹手术引流治疗的有59例(开腹组),对比两组患者的相关临床指标。结果:两组治疗前白细胞、血淀粉酶、尿淀粉酶、血糖值、血钙值差异均无统计学意义(均P0.05),治疗后两组以上实验室指标均较各自治疗前明显改善(均P0.05)。治疗后比较,PCD组血淀粉酶、尿淀粉酶、血糖值均明显低于开腹组患者(均P0.05);PCD组住院时间、住院费用、死亡或放弃治疗率均明显的低于开腹组(均P0.05);两组治疗有效率(79.6%vs.81.4%)、引流液体细菌培养结果差异均无统计学意义(均P0.05)。结论:PCD治疗SAP合并胰腺周围组织坏死感染(胰腺坏死范围30%)的效果确切,同时具有缩短住院时间、减少住院费用的优势。     

CT引导下经皮穿刺引流术治疗重症急性胰腺炎坏死组织感染

目的探讨CT引导下经皮穿刺引流术在治疗重症急性胰腺炎（SAP）合并胰腺坏死组织感染中的应用价值。方法回顾性分析41例SAP合并胰腺坏死组织感染患者的临床资料。对所有患者均进行CT引导下经皮穿刺引流胰腺感染坏死组织治疗,3天后评价引流效果,无明显改善则转为开腹手术引流。结果 CT引导下经皮穿刺引流治愈22例（22/41,53.66%）,穿刺引流后一次性开腹手术成功治愈18例（18/19,94.74%）,穿刺引流后二次开腹手术成功1例（1/19,5.26%）,穿刺后近期并发症发病率为21.95%（9/41）;残余脓肿的清除率100%,远期并发症发病率为2.44%（1/41）。结论 CT引导下经皮穿刺引流术能有效减少开腹手术引流,并提高开腹手术引流成功率,减少并发症。     

超声引导下经皮穿刺置管引流在重症急性胰腺炎治疗中的应用

目的 探讨超声引导下经皮穿刺置管引流(PCD)在重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)治疗中的应用价值.方法 1998年1月至2007年5月,对53例SAP病人行超声引导下PCD治疗急性腹腔积液、腹腔感染和胰腺囊肿.所有病人均在行超声引导下PCD的同时常规放置两枚及必要时多枚引流管并行穿刺液常规和涂片染色、淀粉酶含量测定、细菌培养及药敏试验等检查.结果 该组病人除局部穿刺点短期的疼痛外均无明显导管相关并发症.53例中,1例暴发性胰腺炎病人并发腹腔室隔综合征,PCD后死于急性呼吸窘迫综合征;3例胰腺坏死并发腹腔感染病人PCD后症状未见明显缓解,经剖腹探查行坏死组织清除、外引流术,1例死于多器官功能不全综合征,2例治愈;2例胰腺真性囊肿病人行剖腹探查囊肿切除术;5例胰腺假性囊肿病人行PCD后,引流液未见明显减少,MRCP示囊腔与主胰管相通,行囊肿空肠Roux-er-Y吻合术.其余42例行PCD后均治愈.随访3个月至2年未见复发.总治愈率为96.2%(51/53),总死亡率为3.8%(2/53).结论 SAP的治疗应遵循微创化的原则,选择性应用超声引导下PCD治疗急性腹腔积液、腹腔感染和胰腺囊肿是可行、安全和有效的方法.     

循PCD引流管路径微小切口联合经皮肾镜治疗重症急性胰腺炎感染性坏死

目的:探讨循PCD引流管路径作微小切口联合经皮肾镜清除胰腺坏死组织的方法治疗重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)感染性坏死的临床效果。方法:23例经PCD引流的感染期SAP患者出现引流不畅等治疗效果不佳后,循PCD引流管路径作一约2 cm微小切口,用取石钳取出浅层部分胰腺坏死组织,深在部分坏死组织联合经皮肾镜直视下用网篮取出,在残腔的高、低位分别置入冲洗管及双套管,从腹壁相应较簿的位置戳孔引出并固定,原PCD引流管管口予以关闭。术后用生理盐水自冲洗管冲洗脓腔,双套管负压状态下作持续负压吸引将残余坏死组织逐步清除干净。监测记录患者术前、术后引流量(出入量差)、体温、白细胞(WBC)数、降钙素原(PCT)、C-反应蛋白(CRP),术后1个月复查腹部CT了解胰腺周围坏死组织残余情况。结果:23例感染期SAP经上述方法处理后,感染中毒症状均改善,术后30 d内引流量均较术前明显增多(均P0.05),感染指标(体温、WBC数、PCT、CRP)均在术后不同时间点较术前明显下降(均P0.05),术后1个月左右复查CT显示胰周坏死组及积液基本消失,其中5例术后2周出现冲洗管堵塞需换管继续冲洗引流,所有患者未出现腹腔出血、肠漏、穿孔等并发症,无需行二次微创手术干预或开腹手术处理,患者最终均痊愈出院。结论:循PCD引流管路径作微小切口联合经皮肾镜清除胰腺坏死组织的方法在治疗SAP感染性坏死有较好的临床效果。     

B 超引导下经皮穿刺置管引流治疗重症急性胰腺炎局部并发症

目的:探讨B超引导下经皮穿刺置管引流(PCD)治疗重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)局部并发症的临床价值。方法:回顾分析2006年1月—2009年10月行B超引导下PCD治疗SAP局部并发症的42例患者的临床资料,其中急性液体积聚14例,无菌性胰腺坏死12例,感染性胰腺坏死9例,包裹性坏死感染1例,胰腺脓肿4例,胰腺假性囊肿2例。并检查穿刺液是否伴感染,观察引流后临床症状、引流效果和影像学的改变。结果:42例中,14例急性液体积聚均治愈(100%),但有2例发生胰周感染,1例出现肠外瘘,无死亡;无菌性胰腺坏死12例中治愈9例(75.0%),3例发生胰腺感染并手术,死亡1例;感染性胰腺坏死9例中治愈2例(22.2%),4例引流效果差而手术,死亡2例,3例放弃治疗;包裹性坏死感染1例PCD后囊内出血急诊手术后死亡;4例胰腺脓肿治愈1例(25.0%),3例中转手术,无死亡。2例胰腺假性囊肿分别于第1,2个月后治愈拔管。结论:B超引导下PCD便捷安全,在治疗SAP不同局部并发症中有着不同的意义。对部分SAP局部并发症,B超引导下PCD可避免传统外科干预。     

碳青霉烯类抗生素预防重症急性胰腺炎感染的研究

目的 :分析和探讨重症急性胰腺炎(severe acute pancreatitis,SAP)病人预防性抗生素应用的疗效及其影响因素。方法:选择2011年10月至2016年10月期间我院ICU收治的SAP病人139例,剔除收治入科时已存在感染者,选取应用碳青霉烯类抗生素的病人。最终纳入回顾性研究48例。分为发病72 h内应用组34例和72 h后应用组14例,分别预防性应用碳青霉烯类。分析SAP病人预防性抗生素应用的启动时机与预后的关系。结果:两组病人在ICU内死亡率、胰腺感染和胰外感染发生率、脏器功能衰竭持续时间、ICU住院时间差异均无统计学意义。单因素分析发现,72 h内应用病人的胰腺感染发生率与疾病严重程度(APACHEⅡ评分和SOFA评分)及胰腺病变程度(CT严重程度指数)有关,即评分越高,病人早期预防性抗生素应用失败率越高,而与病人的性别、年龄、胰腺炎病因无关。多因素分析未发现早期预防性抗生素应用失败的影响因素。结论:本研究中,早期即发病72 h内碳青霉烯类预防性抗生素应用方案不能降低SAP病人的ICU内死亡率、胰腺感染发生率和ICU住院时间。对于疾病严重程度高及胰腺坏死严重的病人,需制定个体化治疗方案。     

重症急性胰腺炎合并盆腔腹膜后坏死组织感染的治疗

目的 探讨重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)合并盆腔腹膜后坏死组织感染的治疗方法.方法 回顾性分析2009年12月至2012年2月南京军区南京总医院收治的5例合并盆腔腹膜后坏死组织感染的SAP患者的临床资料,患者均采用全身综合治疗联合局部治疗.结果 综合治疗:5例患者均行肠内营养支持,3例机械通气,3例持续血液滤过;针对小网膜囊、十二指肠旁、肾周间隙的胰腺坏死组织感染,5例患者均采用分步引流策略,先行CT或B超引导下经皮置管引流,然后中转开腹手术引流;合并胰腺坏死组织出血的4例患者经动脉栓塞止血和(或)“三明治”法填塞止血成功.局部治疗:针对盆腔腹膜后坏死组织感染,5例患者均在中转开腹后采取CT引导下经臀经皮置管引流治疗,穿刺距入院时间平均为38.4 d,坏死组织CT密度值平均为24.4 Hu(20～28 Hu).5例患者均在中转开腹手术后穿刺并一次性置管成功,引流管留置平均时间为21 d.患者经臀经皮置管引流后体温及WBC计数均下降,复查CT示盆腔腹膜后坏死组织引流干净,患者痊愈出院.5例患者平均ICU治疗时间为(47 ±20)d,平均总住院时间为(88 ±34)d,平均住院费用为(186 342±15 467)元.随访至2012年5月,患者一般情况良好,无复发.结论 分步引流策略联合CT引导下经臀经皮置管引流是SAP合并盆腔腹膜后坏死组织感染的有效治疗方法.     

经皮穿刺置管引流术治疗重症急性胰腺炎合并胰腺坏死感染的临床效果

目的探讨经皮穿刺置管引流术(PCD)治疗重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)合并胰腺坏死感染的临床效果。方法回顾性分析113例SAP合并胰腺周围组织坏死感染患者的临床资料,其中采用PCD治疗54例作为观察组,采用开腹手术引流治疗59例作为对照组。比较两组患者手术效果、围手术期指标及引流液体细菌培养情况,检测并比较术前、术后7 d的炎症指标和实验室指标。结果观察组治疗有效率为79.6%,低于对照组的81.4%(χ2=0.394,P=0.530);观察组患者的住院时间、住院费用、死亡或放弃治疗率均明显低于对照组(P0.05),但两组患者的再次手术率比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05);两组患者术后7 d的WBC、血淀粉酶、尿淀粉酶、血糖、PCT、TNF-α、IL-8水平较术前均明显降低(P0.05),且观察组血淀粉酶、尿淀粉酶、血糖、PCT、TNF-α、IL-8水平降低程度显著优于对照组(P0.05);两组患者引流液体细菌培养结果比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论 PCD治疗ASP合并胰腺坏死感染的临床效果确切,可有效改善患者术后实验室指标,利于术后胰腺功能恢复,值得临床推广应用。     

《急性胰腺炎诊治指南（2014）》解读——急性胰腺炎外科诊治现状与进展

中华医学会外科学分会胰腺外科学组于2007年颁布的《重症急性胰腺炎诊治指南》对我国急性胰腺炎诊治的规范化及疗效的改善发挥了重要作用。近年来,急性胰腺炎的研究取得了巨大进展,对其诊治的很多重要方面产生了明显的影响。为此,学组对之进行了修订,修订后的指南更名为《急性胰腺炎诊治指南（2014）》。参照国际最新进展,急性胰腺炎依据严重程度分为轻症急性胰腺炎（MAP）、中重症急性胰腺炎（MSAP）和重症急性胰腺炎（SAP）。MSAP与SAP的主要区别在于器官功能衰竭持续的时间不同,MSAP为短暂性（≤48 h）,SAP为持续性（>48 h）。按照国内的临床经验,病程分为3期。早期（急性期）：发病1~2周,此期以全身炎症反应综合征（SIRS）和器官功能衰竭为主要表现,此期构成第一个死亡高峰。中期（演进期）：急性期过后,以胰周液体积聚、坏死性液体积聚或包裹性坏死为主要表现。后期（感染期）：发病4周以后,可发生胰腺及胰周坏死组织合并感染,此期构成MSAP/SAP病人的第二个死亡高峰。局部并发症包括急性胰周液体积聚（APFC）、急性坏死物积聚（ANC）、包裹性坏死（WON）及胰腺假性囊肿。外科治疗的指征主要是胰腺局部并发症继发感染或产生压迫症状。无菌性坏死积液无症状者无需手术治疗。手术治疗应遵循延期原则。感染性坏死可先行针对性抗生素治疗及B超或CT导向下经皮穿刺引流（PCD）。胰腺感染性坏死的手术方式可分为PCD、内镜、微创手术（主要包括小切口手术、视频辅助手术）及开放手术（包括经腹或经腹膜后途径的胰腺坏死组织清除并置管引流）。胰腺感染性坏死病情复杂多样,各种手术方式可遵循个体化原则单独或联合应用。     

重症急性胰腺炎继发胰腺感染的影响因素分析

目的分析ICU收治的急性重症胰腺炎（severe acute pancreatitis,SAP）保守治疗期间胰腺继发感染的相关影响因素。方法回顾性分析56例ICU收治的急性重症胰腺炎病例,将其分为胰腺继发感染组（30例）和未感染组（26例）并对两组间的相关临床参数进行比较。结果未感染组病人住院死亡率和平均ICU住院时间均明显低于感染组（P〈0．05）,单因素分析提示患者人院时的APACHEII评分、Ranson评分、人ICU时功能不全器官个数、发病距入ICU时间、患者入ICU时的天门冬氨酸氨基转移酶（AST）值、行空肠营养距发病时间及质子泵抑制剂应用时间等与SAP继发胰腺感染相关。多变量Logisitic回归分析显示人ICU时功能不全器官个数和发病距入ICU时间是急性重症胰腺炎继发胰腺感染的独立危险因素（P〈0．05）。结论SAP保守治疗期间继发胰腺感染将显著增加患者的死亡率及住院时间,入ICU时功能不全器官个数和发病距入ICU时间是SAP继发胰腺感染的影响因素。     

����Ӧ�ÿ���ҩ������긹�ɹ��޲���34������

??Percutaneous catheter drainage for severe acute pancreatitis complicated with infective pancreatic necrosis: an analysis of 34 cases TONG Zhi-hui, LI Wei-qin, YU Wen-kui, et al . Research Institute of General Surgery, Jinling Hospital, Medicine School of Nanjing University, Nanjing 210002, China
Corresponding author: LI Wei-qin, E-mail: liweiqindr@yahoo.com.cn
Abstract Objective To analyze the clinical effectiveness of percutaneous US- or CT- guided catheter drainage (PCD) for severe acute pancreatitis complicated with infective pancreatic necrosis and the possible influencing factors. Methods The clinical data of 34 cases of infective pancreatic necrosis treated by PCD from January 2008 to February 2010 in Jinling Hospital, Medicine School of Nanjing University were analyzed retrospective. All of them received PCD as the first choice for treatment. After that, they were divided into two groups according to different clinical effectiveness of PCD. The two groups were compared for demographics, systemic and local complications and clinical outcomes. Results Ninteen of the 34 cases were cured through PCD alone (55.9%). Additionally, the number of catheter used for drainage and bacterial culture result were also similar between the two groups. Only the CT value and distribution range of infective pancreatic necrosis were different between them. The logistic regression analysis revealed similar results too. Conclusion The CT value and distribution range of infective pancreatic necrosis could influence the success rate of PCD significantly and should be serious considered before the treatment decision.     

Pancreatic abscess: 10 years experience

Background: Secondary infections of pancreatic and peripancreatic necrosis account for most of the deaths following acute pancreatitis. These infections occur in the form of ‘infected pancreatic necrosis’ and ‘pancreatic abscess’. The latter is a rare complication of acute pancreatitis in comparison with the former. Methods: Twenty‐one patients with pancreatic abscess were managed over a 10‐year period at a tertiary care centre in Northern India. The present report details the clinical profile, investigations performed and management strategy (surgery and intervention radiology) of these patients. The role of surgery and percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) in the management of pancreatic abscess is discussed, with emphasis on the successful outcome seen in a properly selected group of patients managed by PCD. Results: Of the 21 patients, 12 were managed by percutaneous intervention, nine were managed surgically (of these, two had a prior PCD) and two patients were managed conservatively. The overall mortality was 9.5% (2/21). Thus, percutaneous management was suitable for 57% patients, was successful in 83.3%, with a mortality of 8.3%. Surgical therapy alone was offered to 33% of patients, was successful in 85.7%, with a mortality of 14.2%. Complications were seen in four of the nine patients managed by percutaneous drainage alone and eight of the nine patients managed surgically. Conclusions: Pancreatic abscess is a potentially lethal complication in patients recovering from acute pancreatitis. Early diagnosis and prompt intervention with careful selection of patients based on computed tomography imaging for surgical or percutaneous radio­logical management, is met with a successful outcome in a majority of patients. The roles of surgery and PCD are complementary.     

超声引导经皮置管引流治疗重症急性胰腺炎合并感染性坏死

目的：探讨超声引导下经皮置管引流（PCD）治疗重症急性胰腺炎（SAP）合并感染性坏死相关影响因素以及联合胆道镜清创的疗效。 方法：回顾性分析2011年1月—2012年12月以超声引PCD为初始治疗手段的65例SAP合并感染性坏死患者临床资料。 结果：38例（58.5%）仅通过PCD引流治愈,27例（41.5%）需要进一步处理的患者中,4例（6.2%）直接转为开腹手术;23例（35.4%）采取胆道镜引导的腹膜后清创,其中2例因相关并发症转为开腹手术。6例（9.2%）经过PCD或者后续微创/开腹手术治疗后死亡。将单独行PCD治愈的患者与行PCD及后续治疗的患者的资料比较,结果显示,两者的人口学资料、严重度评分、白细胞计数、C反应蛋白及凝血酶原消耗试验等指标差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）,首次PCD治疗时间、穿刺引流管管径上差异也均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）,但前者引流管数量多于后者、引流时间长于后者、穿刺相关并发症低于后者,差异具有统计学意义（均P<0.05）。 结论：引流管数量、引流时间、穿刺相关并发症是PCD的影响因素,对于合并感染性坏死的SAP,联合胆道镜清创是安全有效的微创治疗方法。

     

经皮穿刺置管引流与直接开腹手术引流治疗胰腺坏死组织感染的疗效比较

目的 比较经皮穿刺置管引流和直接开腹手术引流治疗重症急性胰腺炎(SAP)合并胰腺坏死组织感染的临床效果.方法 回顾性分析2008年1月至2009年12月治疗的90例合并胰腺坏死组织感染的SAP患者的临床资料,根据针对感染的胰腺坏死组织首先采取的治疗方法的不同将患者分为经皮穿刺置管引流组和直接开腹手术引流组,其中经皮穿刺置管引流组27例,直接开腹手术引流组63例.经皮穿刺置管引流组首先在彩色超声或CT引导下穿刺置管引流,冲洗3 d后评价引流效果,无明显改善则中转开腹手术引流.直接开腹手术引流组在确诊胰腺坏死组织感染后直接开腹手术引流.结果 经皮穿刺置管引流组的避免开腹手术引流率(48.1%比0,P＜0.05)和一次开腹手术引流成功率(92.9%比85.7%,P＜0.05)均明显高于直接开腹手术引流组,而术后残余脓肿(7.1%比28.6%,P＜0.05)、术后新发单脏器功能障碍(7.4%比28.6%,P＜0.05)、新发消化道瘘(7.4%比27.0%,P＜0.05)、远期并发症(3.7%比22.2%,P＜0.05)的发生率均低于直接开腹手术引流组.此外,经皮穿刺置管引流组的平均ICU治疗时间[(21.2±9.7)d比(28.7±12.1)d,P＜0.01],平均住院时间[(48.2±12.5)d比(59.6±17.5)d,P＜0.05]和住院费用[(191 762±5892)元比(341 689±10 854)元,P＜0.05]均低于直接开腹手术引流组.结论 经皮穿刺置管引流能有效降低多次开腹手术引流率和术后残余脓肿发生率,治疗后近期和远期并发症的发生率均明显下降,并且平均ICU治疗时间、平均住院时间、平均住院费用明显下降.     

Staying the Surgeon’s Hand: Role of Percutaneous Catheter Drainage in Acute Necrotising Pancreatitis

Introduction

Acute necrotising pancreatitis (NP) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Patients with infected pancreatic necrosis (IPN) require some form of intervention in addition to medical management. Although there is no accepted consensus, it is generally agreed that the infected non-vital solid tissue needs to be removed in order to control the sepsis. The results of early surgery have not been encouraging, compared with cases where surgery was delayed or avoided. The placement of percutaneous catheter drains in such a situation helps to decrease the systemic inflammatory response and reverse organ dysfunction.

Aims and objectives

The aim of this study was to review retrospectively the results of percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) in patients with acute NP requiring intervention.

Materials and methods

A retrospective study was conducted of patients presenting with acute NP from March 2012 to June 2015. Demographic, clinical, and perioperative information was retrieved from the medical records. The patients were initially managed in the intensive care unit (ICU) with goal-directed therapy and organ support where indicated. The patients with IPN and few with sterile pancreatic necrosis (SPN) who had persistent organ failure or whose clinical condition was deteriorating despite adequate medical support were subjected to some form of intervention. All the patients requiring PCD or surgical intervention were included in this study. These patients were divided into 3 groups based on the type of intervention: a) PCD only, b) PCD followed by surgical intervention, and (c) surgery alone. The outcome in these 3 groups was analyzed and the factors associated with failure of PCD were identified. In addition, the complications of SPN were investigated.

Results

The records were reviewed of 46 patients diagnosed with acute NP, of which 23 required PCD or surgical intervention and were included in this study. The mean acute physiology and chronic health (APACHE II) score of these patients was 10.6 ± 3.45, while the mean bedside index of severity in acute pancreatitis (BISAP) score was 4.47 ± 0. 53. On contrast enhanced computed tomography (CECT) scan of the abdomen, 39% of the patients had >50% necrosis, with a mean CT severity index (CTSI) of 8.1 ± 1.9. Of the 21 patients treated initially with PCD, a step-up approach was applied in 8 patients, because of failure of PCD. The mean duration from admission to intervention was 19.5 days. A mean of 2.4 pigtail catheters were placed in each patient. Additional drains were placed in 3 patients. The duration of PCD ranged from 20 to 124 days. The mean ICU stay was 14.3 ± 3.2 days and the mean hospital stay was 35.8 ± 7.4 days. Post-intervention complications were recorded in 11 (47.8%) patients, of which 2 patients with PCD developed an external pancreatic fistula and 2 had bleeding. The mortality rate was 26% (6 patients).

Conclusion

PCD is a feasible and successful modality of treatment for acute NP requiring intervention. With the use of PCD, surgical necrosectomy may be completely avoided or delayed until the condition of the patient is stable enough to sustain surgery.

     

The influence of clexane on the fibronectin content in the blood plasma in patients with destructive pancreatitis

The fibronectin content dynamics in the blood serum was estimated in patients with various clinical forms of an acute pancreatitis. The fibronectin level lowering may be a predictor of occurrence and diagnostical criterion for infective complications in patients with destructive pancreatitis. Application of clexane had promoted the fibronectin level raising in the blood serum in patients with sterile and infected pancreatic necrosis.