【摘要】目的 探讨十二指肠镜、腹腔镜联合治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的治疗效果。 方法 采用十二指肠镜取出胆总管结石后，再用腹腔镜切除胆囊治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石病例的方法。 结果 51例患者的治疗均获得成功。 结论 胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的病例，通过十二指肠镜取出胆总管结石后，再行腹腔镜胆囊切除术，可避免开腹或腹腔镜胆总管探查等操作较复杂、创伤较大的手术方式。
Objective To study the effect of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration via choledochotomy and T tube drainage. Metheods Laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct with choledochoscopy via choledochotomy was performed in 105 patients, T tube was placed in all patients with laparoscopic suturing technique.Results Except negative exploration in 2 cases, duct clearance was achieved in 99 per cent (102/103) of patients. Conclusion Laparoscopic exploratoin of common bile duct via choledochotomy and T tube drainage is one of the safe and effective management options for common bile duct calculi.
Objective To assess the benefits and harms of routine primary suture (LBEPS) versus T-tube drainage (LCHTD) following laparoscopic common bile duct stone exploration. Methods The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs were electronically searched from the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2010), PubMed (1978 to 2010), EMbase (1966 to 2010), CBMdisc (1978 to 2010), and CNKI (1979 to 2010); and the relevant published and unpublished data and their references were also searched by hand. The data were extracted and the quality was evaluated by two reviewers independently, and the RevMan 5.0 software was used for data analysis. Results Four studies including 3 RCTs and 1 quasi-RCT involving 274 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that compared with LCHTD, LBEPS was better in shortening operation time (WMD= –17.11, 95%CI –25.86 to –8.36), abdominal drainage time (WMD= –0.74, 95%CI –1.39 to –0.10) and post-operative hospitalization time (WMD= –3.30, 95%CI –3.67 to –2.92), in lowering hospital expenses (WMD= –2 998.75, 95%CI –4 396.24 to –1 601.26) and in reducing the complications due to T-tube such as tube detaching, bile leakage after tube drawing, and choleperitonitis (RR=0.56, 95%CI 0.29 to 1.09). Conclusion LBEPS is superior to LCHTD in total effectiveness for common bile duct stone with the precondition of strictly abiding by operation indication. Due to the low quality of the included studies which decreases the reliability of this conclusion, more reasonably-designed and strictly-performed multi-centered RCTs with large scale and longer follow up time are required to further assess and verify the efficacy and safety of this treatment.
Objective To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of ERCP/S+LC and LC+LCBDE in cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Methods A fully recursive literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMbase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in any language. By using a defined search strategy, both the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials on comparing ERCP/ S+LC with LC+LCBDE in cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis were identified. Data were extracted and evaluated by two reviewers independently. The quality of the included trials was evaluated. Meta-analyses were conducted using the Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 5.0.2 software. Results Fourteen controlled clinical trials (1 544 patients) were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that: a) There were no significant difference in the stone clearance rate between the two groups (RR=0.96, 95%CI 0.92 to 1.01, P=0.14); b) There were no significant difference in the residual stone rate between the two groups (OR=1.05, 95%CI 0.65 to 1.72, P=0.83); c) There were no significant difference in the complications morbidity between the two groups (OR=1.12, 95%CI 0.85 to 1.55, P=0.48); d) There were no significant difference in the mortality during follow-up visit between the two groups (RD= 0.00, 95%CI –0.03 to 0.03, P=0.84); e) The length of hospital stay in the LC+LCBDE group was shorter than that of the ERCP/S+LC group with significant difference (WMD= 1.78, 95%CI 0.94 to 2.62, Plt;0.000 1); and f) The LC+LCBDE group was superior to the ERCP/S+LC group in the aspects of procedure time and total hospital charges. Conclusion Although there aren’t differences in the effectiveness and safety between the ERCP/S+LC group and the LC+LCBDE group, the latter is superior to the former in procedure time, length of hospital stay and total hospital charges. For the influencing factors of lower quality and astable statistical outcomes of the included studies, this conclusion has to be verified with more strictly designed large scale RCTs.
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。
目的:探讨胆总管结石致急性梗阻性黄疸手术治疗的效果。方法:回顾分析72例手术治疗胆总管结石致急性梗阻性黄疸患者的临床资料。结果:术后死亡3例。随访3~6年,效果优良者62例。3例胆总管T管引流术后3年复发肝胆管结石。结论:对该病的治疗术前应尽量做全面辅助检查,明确结石的部位及大小,胆管的形态及位置。根据病情确定手术时机和方式,对保证患者安全,减少术后并发症,提高治愈率有重要意义。
摘要:目的:探讨腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy, LC)后发生严重并发症的原因、治疗措施和经验教训。方法:分析 2007 年 8 月至2009 年 4月期间华西医院胆道外科收治的LC术后发生严重并发症的7例患者的临床资料。结果:2例继发性胆总管结石合并化脓性胆管炎患者,采用内镜下十二指肠乳头切开(endoscopic sphincterotomy, EST)取出结石;3例胆道损伤患者,均进行肝门胆管成形和肝总管空肠吻合术;1例绞窄性肠梗阻患者,切除坏死空肠管后,行空肠对端吻合术;以上6例患者均顺利出院,随访8～20个月,均生活良好。1例患者LC术后发生肺动脉栓塞,积极抢救后因呼吸衰竭而死亡。结论:术中仔细轻柔的操作以及辩清肝总管、胆总管与胆囊管的三者关系是预防LC术后发生严重并发症的关键。合理可行的治疗措施是提高发生并发症的患者生活质量的保障。LC术时,胆道外科医生思想上要高度重视,不可盲目追求速度,必要时及时中转开腹。Abstract: Objective: To investigate the causes and therapeutic measures and the experience and lesson of sever complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Methods:Clinical data of 7 patients with severe complications after LC from August 2007 to April 2009 were analyzed retrospectively. The clinical data was got from biliary department of West China Hospital. Results: Two cases of secondary common bile duct stone with acute suppurative cholangitis got cured by endoscopic sphincterotomy. Three cases of severe bile duct injury after LC had stricture of the hilar bile duct, and all of the cases were performed RouxenY hepaticojejunostomy with the diameter of stoma 2.03.0 centimeters. One case of strangulating intestinal obstruction was cured through jejunum endtoend anastomosis after cutting off the necrotic jejunum. All of the above 6 patients recovered well. Following up for 820 months, all lived well. One patient got pulmonary embolism after LC and dead of respiratory failure after active rescue. Conclusion: Carefully making operation and distinguishing the relationship of hepatic bile duct and common bile duct and the duct of gallbladder are the key points to prevent sever complications during LC. Reasonable and feasible treatment is the ensurement of increasing the living quality of the patients with sever complications after LC. And the surgeons of biliary department must have a correct attitude toward LC and should concern think highly during LC and should not pursue speed blindly. In necessary, the operation of LC should be turned into open cholecystectomy.
Objective To discuss the therapeutic effect and safety of laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus laparoscopiccommon bile duct exploration （LC＋LCBDE） and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography/endoscopic sphincte-rotomy plus LC （ERCP/EST＋LC） for cholecystolithiasis with choledocholithiasis patients with obstructive jaundice. Methods The clinical data of cholecystolithiasis with choledocholithiasis patients with obstructive jaundice from January2011 to June 2012 were analyzed retrospectively. During this period， 48 patients were treated by LC＋LCBDE （LC＋LCBDE group）， and 76 patients by ERCP/EST＋LC （ERCP/EST＋LC group）. Results ①There were no statistical significances in the age， gender， preoperative total bilirubin， alanine aminotransferase， number and maximum diameter of common bile duct stone， and internal diameter of common bile duct in two groups （P＞0.05）. ②No perioperative mortality occurred and no significant differences were observed in terms of stone clearance from the common bile duct， postoperative morbidity， and conversion to open surgery in two groups （P＞0.05）. However， the operative time and post-operative hospital stay in the LC＋LCBDE group were shorter than those in the ERCP/EST＋LC group （P＜0.05）. In addi-tion， the costs of surgical procedure and hospitalization charges in the LC＋LCBDE group were less than those in the ERCP/EST＋LC group （P＜0.05）. Conclusions Both LC＋LCBDE and ERCP/EST＋LC are safe and effective therapies forcholecystolithiasis with choledocholithiasis patients with obstructive jaundice. However， LC＋LCBDE is better for pati-ents’ recovery and cost effective. Especially for patients with common bile duct＞1.0cm in diameter or with multiple common bile duct stones， LC＋LCBDE is the best choice. To sum up， the choice of minimally invasive treatment must be individualized according to the patient’s condition and the availability of local resources.
Objective To summarize the therapeutic efficacy of laparoscope， duodenoscope， and choledochoscopein treatment for elderly patients with common bile duct stones associated with acute severe cholangitis. Methods Eighty-six patients with common bile duct stones associated with severe acute cholangitis from May 2008 to December 2012 in this hospital were chosen. The operation methods and their therapeutic efficacy were analyzed. Results ① Thirty-one patients were performed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy （LC） plus common bile duct discission combined with choledo-choscope for removing the stones， which were completely successful. One case of bile duct perforation happened. The total effective rate was 96.77%（30/31）. The hospital stay was （9.05±2.11） d， the hospital costs was （1.47±0.34） ten thousand yuan. ② Forty-three patients were performed by LC combined with duodenoscopic papillotomy， 42 patients were successful，one patients was turned to the other operation， the retained calculus was found in two patients. The total effective rate was 97.67%（42/43）. The hospital stay was （8.64±1.20） d， the hospital costs was （2.36±0.62） ten thousand yuan. ③ Twelve patients were performed by endoscopic nasobiliary drainage and LC plus common bile duct discission combined with choledochoscope for removing the stones， which were completely successful. The total effective rate was 91.67%（11/12）. The hospital stay was （11.06±2.33） d， the hospital costs was （2.79±0.41） ten thousand yuan. No severe complications such as intestinal perforation， hemorrhea， and severe acute pancreatitis and no death happened. Conclusions Three-endoscopy in treatment for elderly patients with common bile duct stones associated with severe acute cholangitis has a good therapeutic efficacy， a suitable operation is chosen according to the different conditions of the patients， the success rate is high， the complication rate and the mortality rate are low.
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.