An appraisal of surgical and percutaneous drainage for pyogenic liver abscesses larger than 5 cm.
OBJECTIVE
To determine whether first-line treatment with percutaneous or surgical drainage of liver abscesses larger than 5 cm results in better clinical outcome.


BACKGROUND
Pyogenic liver abscesses larger than 5 cm are currently treated by intravenous antibiotics and either percutaneous (PD) or surgical drainage (SD). Percutaneous techniques have been increasingly performed in place of open drainage as first-line treatment. This paradigm shift has been fueled by the drive for low-risk and less-invasive procedures and the surgical option being reserved for percutaneous failures. Yet there is a lack of data to support percutaneous drainage over open surgical drainage as first-line treatment.


METHODS
Over a 3-year period, 80 patients with liver abscesses larger than 5 cm amenable to PD and SD were included in the study. This situation was possible as 1 team of surgeons favored the use of PD and 1 team favored the use of SD as first-line treatment. The treatment outcomes in both groups were compared, and clinical end-points included time to defervescence of fever, failure of treatment, secondary procedures, hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality.


RESULTS
PD was performed in 36 patients and SD in 44 patients as first-line treatment. Clinical, laboratory, and abscess parameters were comparable in both groups. Sixty-four of 80 patients (80%) had multiloculated abscess. The time to defervescence of fever was not statistically significant (PD versus SD, 4.85 versus 4.38 days; P = 0.09). However, SD had less treatment failures (3 versus 10, P = 0.013), less requirement for secondary procedures (5 versus 13, P = 0.01), and shorter length of hospital stay (8 versus 11 days, P = 0.03). There was no difference in morbidity or mortality rates.


CONCLUSIONS
The results of our study show that for large liver abscesses more than 5 cm, SD provides better clinical outcomes than PD in terms of treatment success, number of secondary procedures, and hospital stay with comparable morbidity and mortality rates. SD should be considered as first-line treatment of large liver abscesses.
Tan
Yu-Meng
YM
From the Department of Surgery, Singapore General Hospital Department of Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center, Singapore. gsutym@sgh.com.sg
Chung
Alexander Yaw-Fui
AY
Chow
Pierce Kah-Hoe
PK
Cheow
Peng-Chung
PC
Wong
Wai-Keong
WK
Ooi
London Lucien
LL
Soo
Khee-Chee
KC
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D004322:Drainage / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D046290:Liver Abscess, Pyogenic / Q000150:complications / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery / Q000628:therapy*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011677:Punctures; D016896:Treatment Outcome
Arch Surg. 1996 Feb;131(2):148-52
8611070
Medicine (Baltimore). 1996 Mar;75(2):99-113
8606631
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 1997 Mar-Apr;8(2):241-7
9083991
Int Surg. 1997 Jan-Mar;82(1):98-101
9189815
Aust N Z J Surg. 1999 Mar;69(3):205-9
10075360
Br J Surg. 1953 Sep;41(166):141-52
13093985
Ann Surg. 1996 May;223(5):600-7; discussion 607-9
8651751
Am J Surg. 1979 May;137(5):608-10
378006
Br J Surg. 1982 Jan;69(1):48-51
7053802
Lancet. 1982 Jan 16;1(8264):134-6
6119514
Acta Chir Scand. 1982;148(5):415-21
7180337
Ann Surg. 1984 Sep;200(3):328-35
6465983
Medicine (Baltimore). 1984 Sep;63(5):291-302
6472091
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1985 Mar;144(3):463-7
3871552
Am J Surg. 1985 Apr;149(4):487-94
3885778
Arch Surg. 1986 May;121(5):554-8
3707333
Am J Gastroenterol. 1986 Jul;81(7):550-5
3717117
Br J Surg. 1988 Sep;75(9):862-5
3052693
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993 Apr;160(4):799-802
8456667
Radiology. 1995 Apr;195(1):122-4
7892451