两种不同导丝在经内镜逆行胰胆管造影术中的临床疗效对比

The contrast of clinical efficacy of two different guide wire in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

目的观察两种不同导丝在经内镜逆行胰胆管造影术（ERCP）中的优劣。方法将确定有ERCP指征的124例患者按随机数字表法分为泥鳅导丝组（A组）和斑马导丝组（B组），每组62例。观察两组插管时间、插管成功率及术后并发症发生率。结果A组一次性插管成功率为95．2％（59/2），一次性插管成功时间为（1．38±0．52）min，均显著优于B组的82．3％（51/2）、（1．63±0．61）min（P〈0．05）。A组总插管成功率为95．2％（59/2），与B组的96．8％（60／62）比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。A组术后高淀粉酶血症、胰腺炎的发生率为12．9％（8，62），而B组为32．3％（20／62），两组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论ERCP操作中应用泥鳅导丝在操作时间、一次性插管成功率、术后并发症发生率方面均显著优于斑马导丝。

Objective To observe the comparison of two different guide wire in endoscopic retrograde eholangiopanereatography （ERCP）. Methods One hundred and twenty-four patients who were identified with ERCP indications were divided into the loach guide wire group （group A） and zebra guide wire group （group B） by random digits table, each with 62 cases. Intubation time, rate of suecessful intubation and postoperative complication was compared. Results The rate of of one-time suceessful intubation in group A was 95.2% （59/62）,significantly higher than that in group B [82.3% （51/62）] （P 〈 0.05）. The average time of one-time successful intubation in group A was （ 1.38±0.52） rain, significantly lower than that in group B [（ 1.63±0.61 ） mini （P 〈 0.05）. The rate of total successful intubation in group A was 95.2%（59/62）, in group B was 96.8%（60/62）, there was no significant difference （P〉 0.05）. The rate of postoperative hyperamylasemia and pancreatitis in group A was 12.9% （8/62）, in group B was 32.3% （20/62）, there was significant difference （P 〈 0.05 ）. Conclusion The application of the loach guide wire in ERCP operation is significantly better than that of the zebra guide.