췌장가성낭에 대한 내시경적 배액술과 방사선학적 경피적 배액술의 치료 효과 비교

Background/Aims: Surgical, percutaneous, and endoscopic techniques are used as drainage method for symptomatic and complicated pancreatic pseudocysts. However, there has been no study to compare the effect and complications of the endoscopic and percutaneous drainage methods. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and side effects of these two nonsurgical techniques. Methods: We retrospectively examined the records of 25 patients who had undergone percutaneous or endoscopic drainage for pancreatic pseudocysts from 1995 to 1998. Results: Eleven patients were managed with endoscopic drainage (ED) and fourteen patients were managed with percutaneous drainage (PCD). There was no significant difference between ED group and PCD group in respect to success rate of first trials (9/11 and 14/14, respectively; p=0.183), rate of pain relief (3/5 and 4/6; p=1.00), hospital days (27.3±18.4 and 24.7±26.0 days; p=0.307), rate of conversion to surgical drainage (0/11 and 4/14; p=0.105), and complications (3/14 and 6/11; p=0.115). Moreover, no difference was detected in the rate of patients in whom removal of drainage tube was possible (7/10 and 9/10; p=0.370) or in the duration of drainage (109±47 and 137±116 days; p=0.874). Conclusions: There is no difference in effectiveness and side effect between endoscopic and percutaneous methods for draining pancreatic pseudocysts. The two methods can be used complementarily. (Kor J Gastroenterol 1999;34:510 - 516)