Journals / Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 2

Pankreatik psödokistin sonuçları tahmin edilebilir mi? Yeni bir skorlama sistemi önerisi

Can outcome of pancreatic pseudocysts be predicted? Proposal for a new scoring system

Pages
150–154
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Final scores predicted spontaneous resolution in approximately 80% of patients.CONCLUSION: The scoring system developed to predict resolution of PPs is simple and useful, but requires validation

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:BACKGROUND: The spontaneous resolution rate of pancreatic pseudocysts (PPs) is 86%, and the serious complication rate is 3-9%.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The aim of the present study was to develop a scoring system that would predict spontaneous resolution of PPs.METHODS: Medical records of 70 patients were retrospectively reviewed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Final scores predicted spontaneous resolution in approximately 80% of patients.CONCLUSION: The scoring system developed to predict resolution of PPs is simple and useful, but requires validation
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The spontaneous resolution rate of pancreatic pseudocysts (PPs) is 86%, and the serious complication rate is 3-9%. The aim of the present study was to develop a scoring system that would predict spontaneous resolution of PPs.METHODS: Medical records of 70 patients were retrospectively reviewed. Two patients were excluded. Demographic data and laboratory measurements were obtained from patient records.RESULTS: Mean age of the 68 patients included was 56.6 years. Female:male ratio was 1.34:1. Causes of pancreatitis were stones (48.5%), alcohol consumption (26.5%), and unknown etiology (25%). Mean size of PP was 71 mm. Pseudocysts disappeared in 32 patients (47.1%). With univariate analysis, serum direct bilirubin level (>0.95 mg/dL), cyst carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level (>1.5), and cyst diameter (>55 mm) were found to be significantly different between patients with and without spontaneous resolution. In multivariate analysis, these variables were statistically significant. Scores were calculated with points assigned to each variable. Final scores predicted spontaneous resolution in approximately 80% of patients.CONCLUSION: The scoring system developed to predict resolution of PPs is simple and useful, but requires validation

Özet

AMAÇ: Pankreatik psödokistlerinde spontan rezolüsyon oranı %86, ciddi komplikasyon oranı ise %3-9 olarak bildirilmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı psödokistlerin spontan rezolüsyonunu öngörebilen yeni bir skorlama sistemi geliştirmektir. GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: Yetmiş hastanın tıbbi kayıtları geçmişe yönelik incelendi. İki hasta çalışma dışı bırakıldı. Her hastanın kayıtlarından demografik verileri ve laboratuvar değerleri elde edildi. BULGULAR: Altmış sekiz hastanın ortalama yaşı 56.6 ve kadın/erkek oranı 1.34/1 olarak bulundu. Hastaların %48.5'inde pankreatitin nedeni safra taşları, %26.5'inde kronik alkol kullanımı, %25'inde ise idiopatikti. Ortalama kist çapı 71 mm idi. Takip esnasında 32 hastada (%47.1) psödokist kayboldu. Tek değişkenli analizler incelendiğinde kist çapı (>55 mm) ile serum dierkt bilirübin (>0.95 mg/dL) ve kist CEA (>1.5) değerlerinin spontan rezolüsyon saptanan ve saptanmayan hastalar arasında anlamlı derecede farklı olduğu görüldü. Çok değişkenli analizler sonrasında da aynı değişkenlerde istatistiksel anlamlı farklılık saptandı. Skorlar bu değişkenlere atanan puanlar toplanarak elde edildi. Nihai puanlar ile %80 hastada spontan rezolüsyon tahmin edilebildi. TARTIŞMA: Basit ve kolay uygulanabilir olan skorlama sistemimiz ile psödokist rezolüsyonunu tahmin etmek mümkün olabileceği kannatindeyiz; yine de geçerlilik ve güvenilirliğinin daha detaylı değerlendirilmesi gerekmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞENOL, K., AKGÜL, Ö., GÜNDOĞDU, S. B., AYDOĞAN, İ., TEZ, M., COŞKUN, F., TİHAN, D. N. (2016). Pankreatik psödokistin sonuçları tahmin edilebilir mi? Yeni bir skorlama sistemi önerisi. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 2, 150–154. https://ajindex.com/articles/323737

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Banks PA, Bollen TL, Dervenis C, Gooszen HG, Johnson CD, Sarr MG, et al. Classification of acute pancreatitis--2012: revision of the Atlanta classification and definitions by international consensus. Gut 2013;62:102-11.
  2. Cui ML, Kim KH, Kim HG, Han J, Kim H, Cho KB, et al. Incidence, risk factors and clinical course of pancreatic fluid collections in acute pan- creatitis. Dig Dis Sci 2014;59:1055-62.
  3. Kim KO, Kim TN. Acute pancreatic pseudocyst: incidence, risk factors, and clinical outcomes. Pancreas 2012;41:577-81.
  4. Samuelson AL, Shah RJ. Endoscopic management of pancreatic pseudo- cysts. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2012;41:47-62.
  5. Bergman S, Melvin WS. Operative and nonoperative management of pancreatic pseudocysts. Surg Clin North Am 2007;87:1447-60.
  6. Behrns KE, Ben-David K. Surgical therapy of pancreatic pseudocysts. J Gastrointest Surg 2008;12:2231-9.
  7. Cannon JW, Callery MP, Vollmer CM Jr. Diagnosis and manage- ment of pancreatic pseudocysts: what is the evidence? J Am Coll Surg 2009;209:385-93.
  8. Sankaran S, Walt AJ. The natural and unnatural history of pancreatic pseudocysts. Br J Surg 1975;62:37-44.
  9. Warshaw AL, Rattner DW. Timing of surgical drainage for pancreatic pseudocyst. Clinical and chemical criteria. Ann Surg 1985;202:720-4.
  10. Yeo CJ, Bastidas JA, Lynch-Nyhan A, Fishman EK, Zinner MJ, Cameron JL. The natural history of pancreatic pseudocysts documented by com- puted tomography. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1990;170:411-7.
  11. Walt AJ, Bouwman DL, Weaver DW, Sachs RJ. The impact of technol- ogy on the management of pancreatic pseudocyst. Fifth annual Samuel Jason Mixter Lecture. Arch Surg 1990;125:759-63.
  12. Behrman SW, Melvin WS, Ellison EC. Pancreatic pseudocysts following acute pancreatitis. Am J Surg 1996;172:228-31.
  13. Gouyon B, Lévy P, Ruszniewski P, Zins M, Hammel P, Vilgrain V, et al. Predictive factors in the outcome of pseudocysts complicating alcoholic chronic pancreatitis. Gut 1997;41:821-5.
  14. Cheruvu CV, Clarke MG, Prentice M, Eyre-Brook IA. Conservative treatment as an option in the management of pancreatic pseudocyst. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2003;85:313-6.
  15. Nguyen BL, Thompson JS, Edney JA, Bragg LE, Rikkers LF. Influence of the etiology of pancreatitis on the natural history of pancreatic pseudo- cysts. Am J Surg 1991;162:527-31.
  16. Pitchumoni CS, Agarwal N. Pancreatic pseudocysts. When and how should drainage be performed? Gastroenterol Clin North Am 1999;28:615-39.
  17. Brugge WR, Lewandrowski K, Lee-Lewandrowski E, Centeno BA, Szy- dlo T, Regan S, et al. Diagnosis