메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
대한소화기내시경학회 Clinical Endoscopy Clinical Endoscopy 제52권 제4호
발행연도
2019.1
수록면
353 - 359 (7page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Background/Aims: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural drainage for peripancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) has gainedwide acceptance as a nonsurgical intervention. Although a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) was recently introduced, there are fewdata comparing the clinical outcomes between LAMS and plastic stent (PS) drainage. Methods: Endoscopy databases of all patients who had undergone EUS-guided drainage for PFCs were searched and the clinicaloutcomes of EUS-guided drainage according to stent-type used were compared. Results: A total of 27 patients (median age, 56 years) with PFCs underwent EUS-guided transmural drainage between January 2011 andDecember 2017. Of these, 17 underwent PS placement and 10 underwent LAMS placement. There was no significant difference in thetechnical success rate between the 2 groups (94.1% vs. 100%, p=1.0). Procedure time was shorter in the LAMS group compared to thatin the PS group (10.6±2.5 min vs. 21.4±9.5 min, p=0.002). Among subjects with clinical success, recurrence of PFC after stent removaloccurred in 5 of 12 patients with PS and 4 of 10 with LAMS, without statistical difference (41.7% vs. 40.0%, p=1.0). Conclusions: Although our study showed similar clinical outcomes for LAMS and PS, further prospective trials are required to validatethe superiority of LAMS.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (24)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0