Full-text resources of PSJD and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl
Preferences help
Polish version English version Language
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results

Results found: 3

Number of results on page
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  endoscopic ultrasonography
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

Advances in pain treatment in patients with pancreatic cancer

100%
Rykowski J. J.
Ból
|
2012
|
vol. 13
|
issue 3
43
EN
Advances in pain treatment in patients with pancreatic cancerThe author discusses the therapeutic possibilities in pancreatic cancer. Quick and initially asymptomatic disease makes analgesic treatment according to WHO treatment guidelines ineffective. The other treatments include: percutaneous use of opioids in the form of patches, intrathecal administration of opioids, celiac plexus neurolysis and endoscopic ultrasound techniques.
PL
Autor omawia możliwości postępowania terapeutycznego w raku trzustki. Szybki i początkowo bezobjawowy przebieg choroby powoduje, że postępowanie przeciwbólowe według zaleceń terapeutycznych WHO jest często mało skuteczne. Z innych sposobów leczenia należy wymienić: przezskórne stosowanie opioidów w postaci plastrów, okołordzeniowe zastosowanie opioidów, neuroliza splotu trzewnego oraz techniki ultrasonografii endoskopowej
2
Content available remote

A Prospective Study on Endoscopic Ultrasonography Criteria to Guide Management in Upper GI Submucosal Tumors

88%
Will U., Fueldner F., Mueller A.-K., Meyer F.
Polish Journal of Surgery
|
2011
|
vol. 83
|
issue 2
63-69
EN
Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) can differentiate between impression and submucosal tumor (SMT) but it is not known whether EUS criteria can reliably guide management.The aim of this prospective study was to assess an approach to recommend removal versus follow-up investigation based on clinical and EUS criteria, with respect to the predictive values to recognize malignancy versus benign lesions.Material and methods. Over a 7-years time period, all patients referred for the EUS assessment of submucosal upper GI lesions were prospectively enrolled. Extraluminal impressions diagnosed with EUS were not further considered. If submucosal tumors seen with EUS were clearly symptomatic or one of several parameters (tumor size >3 cm, irregular margins, inhomogeneous echotexture and/or enlarged lymph nodes) were found, resection was recommended. The remaining cases were subjected to EUS follow-up.Results. Of cases with 241 submucosal lesions, 65 had impressions and 176 had true submucosal lesions. Of the latter, 29 cases had non-neoplastic lesions (cysts, varices). In 59 cases, removal was deemed necessary due to clinical symptoms and suspicious findings in conventional endoscopy. These subjects underwent either surgical (originating layer, muscularis propria) or endoscopic resection (submucosal origin): 35.6% were malignant, more frequently in the surgical group (41.6% vs 20%). However, in 52.5% (n=31) of the 59 cases with no severe symptoms and true SMT, EUS suggested removal because of their additional criteria. Eighteen patients (12.2%) refused SMT removal and even regular EUS-based follow-up investigation. Clinical follow-up investigation by the family practitioner did not show frank malignancy in these cases (retransferal not registered). Follow-up investigation with EUS was recommended in 70 cases (mean follow-up period, 5 years; range, 1-7 years). The pattern remained unchanged in 67/70, and 2 of the 3 cases with changes underwent surgery for benign leiomyoma (patient refusal, n=1 with no change in the one-year follow-up MRI).Conclusions. An EUS strategy based on defined characteristics to remove SMT with no severe symptoms and suspicious finding in the conventional endoscopy shows a good adherence to the recommended approach and has a reasonable positive predictive value for malignancy (88%). Clinical symptoms alone or with endoscopic finding are frequently too vague to decide for a reasonable SMT resection. The chosen EUS criteria are valuable to: 1) achieve the primary resection of all potentially malignant SMT and 2) avoid to overlook them as shown by the results of the follow-up investigations with no detected malignant lesion.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Ultrasonografia endoskopowa (EUS) w diagnostyce i leczeniu kamicy przewodów dróg żółciowych. Współczesna rola ECPW

63%
Kiełtucki J.
Annales Academiae Medicae Silesiensis
|
2017
|
vol. 71
326-330
EN
Precise evaluation of the presence of bile duct stones, performed using the most non-invasive method, is important for the planning of optimal treatment. Not only simple imaging procedures (like conventional transabdominal ultrasound – US) but also more sophisticated imaging methods (CT or MRI) are frequently unreliable. The optimal method of bile duct stone non-invasive diagnostics is magnetic resonance cholangiography. The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in diagnostics has receded into the background due to the possibility of numerous serious complications. Despite some limitations such as potentially increased treatment costs as well as the necessity of the procedure to be performed by a surgeon experienced in both endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography as well as endoscopic ultrasonography, diagnostic endoscopic ultrasonography followed by simultaneous endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography aimed at gallstone removal is the most efficient diagnostic and therapeutic management scheme in cases of suspected choledocholithiasis. The use of endoscopic ultrasonography allows one to limit the number of performed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures by more than 2/3. Ascending endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography combined with an endoscopic incision into the ampulla of Vater followed by mechanical evacuation of stone deposits from the ducts still remains a the optimal procedure in the treatment of choledocholithiasis.
PL
Precyzyjna diagnostyka obecności kamicy żółciowej przewodowej, przeprowadzona możliwie najmniej inwazyjnymi metodami, jest ważna przy podejmowaniu decyzji terapeutycznych. Nie tylko proste badania (jak konwencjonalna ultrasonografia – USG), ale też bardziej wyszukane metody obrazowania (tomografia komputerowa, rezonans magnetyczny) są często zawodne. Złotym standardem nieinwazyjnej diagnostyki kamicy przewodowej jest cholangiografia rezonansu magnetycznego – cholangio MRI. Rola cholangiopankreatografii wstecznej – ECPW w diagnostyce nieco przesunęła się na dalszy plan, ze względu na możliwość licznych istotnych powikłań. Pomimo pewnych wad, takich jak potencjalnie zwiększony koszt leczenia, konieczność wykonywania zabiegu przez lekarza doświadczonego zarówno w endoskopowej cholangiopankreatografii, jak i endoskopowej ultrasonografii, najbardziej efektywnym schematem postępowania diagnostyczno-terapeutycznego w przypadku podejrzenia kamicy przewodowej jest wykonanie diagnostycznej endoskopowej ultrasonografii z następową, jednoczasową endoskopową cholangiopankreatografią celem usunięcia złogów. Zastosowanie endoskopowej ultrasonografii pozwala ograniczyć liczbę wykonywanych endoskopowych cholangiopankreatografii o ponad 2/3. Endoskopowa cholangiopankreatografia wsteczna połączona z endoskopowym nacięciem zwieracza brodawki Vatera i mechaniczną ewakuacją złogów z przewodu nadal pozostaje złotym standardem w leczeniu kamicy przewodowej.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.