Users Online : 196 About us |  Subscribe |  e-Alerts  | Feedback | Login   
Journal of Minimal Access Surgery Current Issue | Archives | Ahead Of Print Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
           Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Ahead of Print

Endoscopic cystogastrostomy versus surgical cystogastrostomy in the management of acute pancreatic pseudocysts


1 Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Govind Ballabh Pant Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education and Research, New Delhi, India
2 Department of Gastroenterology, Govind Ballabh Pant Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education and Research, New Delhi, India

Correspondence Address:
Sundeep Singh Saluja,
Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Govind Ballabh Pant Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education and Research, 1, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, New Delhi - 110 002
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jmas.JMAS_109_18

PMID: 30777987

Background: Studies comparing surgical versus endoscopic drainage of pseudocyst customarily include patients with both acute and chronic pseudocysts and the endoscopic modalities used for drainage are protean. We compared the outcomes following endoscopic cystogastrostomy (ECG) and surgical cystogastrostomy (SCG) in patients with acute pseudocyst. Methods: Seventy-three patients with acute pseudocyst requiring drainage from 2011 to 2014 were analysed (18 patients excluded: transpapillary drainage n = 15; cystojejunostomy n = 3). The remaining 55 patients were divided into two groups, ECG n = 35 and SCG n = 20, and their outcomes (technical success, successful drainage, complication rate and hospital stay) were compared. Results: The technical success (31/35 [89%] vs. 20/20 [100%]P = 0.28), complication rate (10/35 [28.6%] vs. 2/20 [10%]; P= 0.17) and median hospital stay (6.5 days [range 2–12] vs. 5 days [range 3–12]; P= 0.22) were comparable in both the groups, except successful drainage which was higher in surgical group (27/35 [78%] vs. 20/20 [100%] P = 0.04). The conversion rate to surgical procedure was 17%. The location of cyst towards tail of pancreas and presence of necrosis were the main causes of technical failure and failure of successful endoscopic drainage, respectively. Conclusion: Surgical drainage albeit remains the gold standard for management of pseudocyst drainage; endoscopic drainage should be considered a first-line treatment in patients with acute pseudocyst considering the reasonably good success rate.


Print this article
Search
 Back
 
  Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Saluja SS
    -  Srivastava S
    -  Govind S H
    -  Dahale A
    -  Sharma BC
    -  Mishra PK
 Citation Manager
 Article Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed252    
    PDF Downloaded6    

Recommend this journal

2004 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 15th August '04