Percutaneous treatment of intrabdominal abscess: urokinase versus saline serum in 100 cases using two surgical scoring systems in a randomized trial.
Author(s): Laborda A, De Gregorio MA, Miguelena JM, Medrano J, Gomez-Arrue J, Serrano C, de Blas I, Gimenez M, D'Agostino H
Affiliation(s): GITMI, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain. email@example.com
Publication date & source: 2009-07, Eur Radiol., 19(7):1772-9. Epub 2009 Feb 4.
Publication type: Randomized Controlled Trial
The purpose of this study was to assess whether regular instillation of urokinase during abscess drainage leads to an improved outcome compared to saline irrigation alone. One hundred patients referred for image-guided abdominal abscess drainage were randomized between thrice daily urokinase instillation or saline irrigation alone. At the end of the study, patient medical records were reviewed to determine drainage, study group, Altona (PIA II) and Mannheim (MPI) scoring, duration of drainage, procedure-related complications, hospital stay duration, and clinical outcome. The technical success rate of the percutaneous abscess drainage was 100%. The success or failure of abscess remission did not differ significantly between groups (success rate of 91.5% in the urokinase group vs. 88.8% in the saline group; failure rate was of 8.5 vs. 21.2%, respectively); however, days of drainage, main hospital stay, and overall costs were significantly reduced in patients treated with urokinase compared to the control group (P < 0.05). No adverse effects from urokinase were observed. Surgical scores were a useful homogeneity factor, and MPI showed a good correlation with prognosis, while PIA results did not have a significant correlation. For drainage of complex abscesses (loculations, hemorrhage, viscous material), fibrinolytics safely accelerate drainage and recovery, reducing the length of the hospital stay and, therefore, the total cost.