目的探讨腹腔镜联合胆道镜治疗胆囊及胆总管结石的临床疗效。 方法回顾性分析2010年1月至2013年1月期间收治于笔者所在科室的96例胆囊及胆总管结石患者的临床资料，根据手术方式分为开腹组、腹腔镜联合胆道镜＋T管引流术组和腹腔镜联合胆道镜＋放置鼻胆管一期缝合组3组。对3组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、肛门排气时间、住院时间、残石率、复发率、并发症发生率、手术有效率及术后淀粉酶和肝功能指标水平进行对比分析。 结果微创手术组与开腹组比较，患者的出血量、肛门排气时间、住院时间、残石率、复发率及并发症发生率均减少、缩短或降低，同时手术的有效率提高（P＜0.05）；腹腔镜联合胆道镜＋放置鼻胆管一期缝合组术后淀粉酶和肝功能指标的水平较其他2组明显降低（P＜0.05）。 结论微创手术创伤小，残石率及复发率低，并发症少，患者术后恢复快，是一种安全有效的治疗方式，值得临床推广应用。
Objective To investigate therapeutic effect of endoscopic sphincterotomy with small incision (SES) combined with endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) in treatment of larger common bile duct stones. Methods The clinical data of 80 patients with common bile duct stones treated in our hospital from February 2014 to October 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. These patients were divided into endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) group (n = 40) and SES+EPBD group (n = 40) according to the therapeutic methods. The diameter of common bile duct stone was 10–20 mm. The operation status, recurrence rate and residual rate of common bile duct stone, and complications rate within 3 months after operation were compared between these two groups. Results The age and gender had no significant differences between these two groups (P>0.05). The operation time was shorter (P<0.05) and the intraoperative bleeding was less (P<0.05) in the SES+EPBD group as compared with the EST group. There were no significant differences in the hospital stay and recovery time of gastrointestinal function between these two groups (P>0.05). The levels of ALT, AST, DBIL, and TBIL in these two groups before treatment had no significant differences (P>0.05); after treatment, the above indicators of liver function in the SES+EPBD group were significantly lower than those in the EST group (P<0.05), and which were significantly decreased more in the same group (P<0.05). The residual stone, stone recurrence, and complications such as acute pancreatitis, acute cholangitis, bile leakage and postoperative hemorrhage were not found in the SES+EPBD group, the rates of these indicators in the SES+EPBD group were significantly lower than those in the EST group (P<0.05). Conclusion SES combined with EPBD has a good therapeutic effect on larger common bile duct stones (diameter of common bile duct stone is 10–20 mm) and recurrence rate is low.
ObjectiveTo compare difference of therapeutic effects between endoscopic frequency-doubled double pulse neodymium yttrium aluminium garnet (FREDDY) laser and endoscopic traditional mechanical lithotripsy in treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDs).MethodsThe clinical data of 207 patients with CBDs treated with ERCP and lithotripsy in the Ninth People’s Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine from March 2009 to March 2019 were analyzed retrospectively, of which 71 cases treated by FREDDY (FREDDY group) and 136 cases treated by mechanical lithotripsy (mechanical group). The success rate of stone removal, operation time, postoperative hospitalization time, hospitalization cost, consumables cost, and complications were compared between the two groups.ResultsThere were no significant differences in the general condition and the preoperative clinical data between the two groups (P>0.05). There was no perioperative death in the two groups. There were no significant differences in terms of the postoperative routine laboratory biochemical indexes, consumables cost, hospitalization cost, and rates of the bleeding, postoperative pancreatitis, perforation and biliary tract infection between the two groups (P>0.05). Although the operation time of the FREDDY group was significantly longer than that of the mechanical group (P<0.05), the success rate of stone removal was significantly higher, the postoperative hospitalization time was shorter, the total complications rate and stone residual rate were significantly lower in the FREDDY group as compared with the mechanical group (P<0.05).ConclusionEndoscopic FREDDY laser lithotripsy has a better curative effect and less complications in treatment of large CBDs than mechanical lithotripsy, but operation time needs further to be improved.
ObjectiveTo explore the clinical efficacy and surgical techniques of laparoscopic choledocholithotomy and primary suture. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 58 patients who underwent laparoscopic choledocholithotomy and primary suture between January 2009 and December 2014. ResultsAll the 58 patients underwent the surgery successfully. Operation time was 45-125 minutes, averaging 75 minutes. Intraoperative blood loss was between 10 and 50 mL with an average of 20 mL. Postoperative hospital stay was 5-14 days with an average of 7 days. Four cases of biliary leakage were cured by conservative treatment. ConclusionWith operation indications strictly grasped and skillful operation techniques, laparoscopic choledocholithotomy and primary suture are safe and reliable with a good curative effect.
目的:总结应用腹腔镜联合胆道镜治疗胆总管结石的体会。方法:回顾分析2003年1月至2009年5月成都市第五人民医院联合应用腹腔镜胆道镜治疗胆总管结石的临床资料。结果:经胆囊颈管取石成功21例,切开胆总管取石27例,其中胆总管I期缝合17例,T管引流31例,3例术后发生胆总管残余结石,经T管窦道胆道镜取石治愈,5例中转开腹。结论:选择合适病例,腹腔镜联合胆道镜治疗胆总管结石患者创伤小,效果好,且安全可靠。
Objective To evaluate the safety and efficacy of primary closure (PC) and T-tube drainage (TD) after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Methods The randomized controlled trials of PC and TD after LCBDE were retrieved from the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until April 2015. All calculations and statistical tests were performed using ReviewerManager 5.2 software. Results Both of the two groups had no postoperative deaths within 30 days. The operative time and hospital stay of PC gourp were shorter than TD group statistically〔OR=–24.76, 95CI (–29.21, –20.31),P<0.000 01〕and〔OR=–2.68, 95%CI (–3.69, –1.67),P<0.000 01〕. The reoperative rate of PC group was lower than that of TD group, and the difference was statistically significant〔OR=0.20, 95%CI (0.05, 0.81),P=0.02〕. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the occurrence of postoperative severe complications〔OR=0.54, 95%CI (0.26, 1.12),P=0.10〕. Conclusions Compared with the TD group, the operative time and hospitalization time are shorer in PC group, and complication rate is similar, but the cost of treatment of the TD group is higher than PC group, so after LCBDE a primary closure of common bile duct is safe and effective method.
Objective To investigate the effect of laparoscopy combined with choledochoscopy on common bile duct (CBD) stones with primary suture of the CBD. Methods Totally 523 patients of gallbladder stone companied with CBD stones or choledochectasia (diameter ≥0.8 cm) from September 1998 to December 2008 were retrospectively analyzed. Results The primary suture of the CBD incision was successfully performed in 487 patients. The CBD stones were completely removed during the operation in 400 patients. Nothing was found in 87 cases. In 10 cases conversion to open surgery were performed and in 26 cases the T tube drainage was put into the CBD in choledocholithotomy. Average operative time was 90 min and average bleeding volume was 50 ml. All patients took food at 24 h, returned general activity on 2-3 d and discharged on 5 d after operation. Postoperative biliary leakage occurred in 29 cases with drainage average volume of 35 ml/d and continued 1-6 d, which were cured by non-operation therapy. Conclusions The primary suture of the CBD during the laparosocopy combined with choledochosopy in choledocholithotomy is a safe and effective operation with less invasion, less pain and quicker recovery. CBD incision suture without T tube drainage can be done when CBD stones are cleared completely and no stenosis is found in extrahepatic bile duct.
Objective To study the clinical effects of laparoscope combined with choledochoscope in patients with cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Methods Clinical data of 74 patients with cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis between Mar. 2009 and Feb. 2011 in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Among them， 37 cases underwent the laparoscope combined with choledochoscope operation （referred to as the double mirror operation group） and 37 cases underwent the conventional open operation （open operation group）. The intraoperative conditions， therapeutic effect， and complications of patients in 2 groups were compared. Results The stone clearance rates of the two groups were 100%. The recurrence rate of 2 groups in the follow-up process was no significantly difference （P＞0.05）. In the double mirror operation group， the operative time was significantly longer than that open operation group （P＜0.01）；the intraoperative bleeding was significantly less than that open operation group （P＜0.01）；the anal exhaust time after operation， get out of bed time after operation， and total duration of hospitalization were significantly shorter than that open operation group （P＜0.01）；and the incidence of postoperative complications was significantly lower than that open oper-ation group（P＜0.01）. Conclusion Laparoscope combined with choledochoscope in treatment of cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis patients has exact effects， with minor trauma， quicker recovery， and fewer complications， and it’s worthy of promotion.
ObjectiveTo compare the cost-effectiveness between endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) treatment and laparotomy treatment for simple common bile duct stone or common bile duct stone combined with gallbladder benign lesions. MethodsA total of 596 patients with common bile stone received ERCP (ERCP group) and 173 received open choledocholithotomy (surgical group) in our hospital between January 2009 and December 2012. Their clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. The curing rate, postoperative complications, hospital stay, preoperational preparation and total cost were compared between the two groups of patients. Meanwhile, for common bile stone combined with gallbladder benign lesion, 29 patients received ERCP combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) (ERCP+LC group), 38 received pure laparoscopy treatment (laparoscopy group) and 129 received open choledocholithotomy combined with cholecystectomy (surgery group). ResultsFor simple common bile stone patients, no significant difference was found in cure rate and post-operative complication between endoscopic and surgical treatment groups (P>0.05). However, total hospitalization expenses[(13.1±6.3) thousand yuan, (20.6±7.5) thousand yuan)], hospital stay[(8.91±4.95), (12.14±5.15) days] and preoperative preparation time[(3.77±3.09), (5.13±3.99) days] were significantly different between the two groups (P<0.05). For patients with common bile stone combined with gallbladder benign lesion, no significant discrepancy was detected among the three groups in curing rate and post-operative complications (P>0.05). Significant differences were detected between ERCP+LC group and surgical group in terms of total hospitalization expense[(18.9±4.6) thousand yuan, (23.2±8.9) thousand yuan] hospital stay[(9.00±3.74), (12.47±4.50) days] and preoperative preparation time[(3.24±1.83), (5.15±2.98) days]. No significant difference was found in total hospitalization expense and hospital stay, while significant difference was detected in preoperative preparation time between ERCP+LC group and simple LC group. ConclusionFor patients with simple common bile stone, ERCP is equivalent to surgery in the curing rate, and has more advantages such as less cost, shorter length of hospital stay, and lower preoperative preparation time. For the treatment of common bile duct stone with gallbladder benign disease, ERCP combined with LC also has more advantages than traditional surgery.