Display options
Cite
Kitamura K, Yamamiya A, Ishii Y, et al. Electrocautery vs non-electrocautery dilation catheters in endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic fluid collection drainage. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;8(13):458-65doi: 10.4253/wjge.v8.i13.458.
Kitamura, K., Yamamiya, A., Ishii, Y., Nomoto, T., Honma, T., & Yoshida, H. (2016). Electrocautery vs non-electrocautery dilation catheters in endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic fluid collection drainage. World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 8(13), 458-65. https://doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v8.i13.458
Kitamura, Katsuya, et al. "Electrocautery vs non-electrocautery dilation catheters in endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic fluid collection drainage." World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy vol. 8,13 (2016): 458-65. doi: https://doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v8.i13.458
Kitamura K, Yamamiya A, Ishii Y, Nomoto T, Honma T, Yoshida H. Electrocautery vs non-electrocautery dilation catheters in endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic fluid collection drainage. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2016 Jul 10;8(13):458-65. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v8.i13.458. PMID: 27433292; PMCID: PMC4937161.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2016 Jul 10;8(13):458-65. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v8.i13.458.

Electrocautery vs non-electrocautery dilation catheters in endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic fluid collection drainage.

World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy

Katsuya Kitamura, Akira Yamamiya, Yu Ishii, Tomohiro Nomoto, Tadashi Honma, Hitoshi Yoshida

Affiliations

  1. Katsuya Kitamura, Akira Yamamiya, Yu Ishii, Tomohiro Nomoto, Tadashi Honma, Hitoshi Yoshida, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Showa University School of Medicine, Tokyo 142-8666, Japan.

PMID: 27433292 PMCID: PMC4937161 DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v8.i13.458

Abstract

AIM: To investigate the safety and utility of an electrocautery dilation catheter for endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided pancreatic fluid collection drainage.

METHODS: A single-center, exploratory, retrospective study was conducted between August 2010 and August 2014. This study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of our institution. Informed, written consent was obtained from each patient prior to the procedure. The subjects included 28 consecutive patients who underwent EUS-guided transmural drainage (EUS-TD) for symptomatic pancreatic and peripancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) by fine needle aspiration using a 19-gauge needle. These patients were retrospectively divided into two groups based on the use of an electrocautery dilation catheter as a fistula dilation device; 15 patients were treated with an electrocautery dilation catheter (electrocautery group), and 13 patients were treated with a non-electrocautery dilation catheter (non-electrocautery group). We evaluated the technical and clinical successes and the adverse events associated with EUS-TD for the treatment of PFCs between the two groups.

RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, sex, type, location and diameter of PFCs between the groups. Thirteen patients (87%) in the electrocautery group and 10 patients (77%) in the non-electrocautery group presented with infected PFCs. The technical success rates of EUS-TD for the treatment of PFCs were 100% (15/15) and 100% (13/13) for the electrocautery and the non-electrocautery groups, respectively. The clinical success rates of EUS-TD for the treatment of PFCs were 67% (10/15) and 69% (9/13) for the electrocautery and the non-electrocautery groups, respectively (P = 0.794). The procedure time of EUS-TD for the treatment of PFCs in the electrocautery group was significantly shorter than that of the non-electrocautery group (mean ± SD: 30 ± 12 min vs 52 ± 20 min, P < 0.001). Adverse events associated with EUS-TD for the treatment of PFCs occurred in 0 patients and 1 patient for the electrocautery and the non-electrocautery groups, respectively (P = 0.942).

CONCLUSION: EUS-TD using an electrocautery dilation catheter as a fistula dilation device for the treatment of symptomatic PFCs appears safe and contributes to a shorter procedure time.

Keywords: Electrocautery dilation catheter; Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided transmural drainage; Fistula dilation device; Pancreatic and peripancreatic fluid collection; Procedure time

References

  1. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Nov;64(5):805-8 - PubMed
  2. Surg Endosc. 2006 Apr;20(4):603-7 - PubMed
  3. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 May;69(6):1085-94 - PubMed
  4. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014 Jun;79(6):921-8; quiz 983.e2, 983.e5 - PubMed
  5. Gastroenterology. 2013 Sep;145(3):583-90.e1 - PubMed
  6. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Apr;63(4):635-43 - PubMed
  7. Endoscopy. 2001 Jun;33(6):473-7 - PubMed
  8. BMC Gastroenterol. 2013 Nov 25;13:161 - PubMed
  9. Gastrointest Endosc. 1998 Aug;48(2):200-3 - PubMed
  10. Endoscopy. 2000 Mar;32(3):255-9 - PubMed
  11. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 May;77(5):809-14 - PubMed
  12. JOP. 2006 Nov 10;7(6):616-24 - PubMed
  13. Surg Endosc. 2013 May;27(5):1835-9 - PubMed
  14. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Apr;63(4):688-92 - PubMed
  15. World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Nov 21;20(43):16191-6 - PubMed
  16. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002 Jul;56(1):7-17 - PubMed
  17. Gut. 2013 Jan;62(1):102-11 - PubMed
  18. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Dec;82(6):1039-46 - PubMed
  19. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008 Dec;68(6):1102-11 - PubMed
  20. Endoscopy. 2014 Dec;46(12 ):1078-84 - PubMed
  21. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Apr;75(4):870-6 - PubMed
  22. J Gastrointest Surg. 2011 Nov;15(11):2080-8 - PubMed
  23. Endoscopy. 2015 Jan;47(1):47-55 - PubMed
  24. Endoscopy. 2006 Apr;38(4):355-9 - PubMed
  25. Arq Gastroenterol. 2008 Jan-Mar;45(1):17-21 - PubMed

Publication Types