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(1978 to 2010), EMbase (1966 to 2010), CBMdisc (1978 to 2010), and CNKI (1979 to 2010); and the relevant published and unpublished data and their references were also searched by hand.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.
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。
目的 比较腹腔镜胆道探查术后胆总管一期缝合与T管引流两种术式治疗胆囊结石合并胆管结石的疗效。方法 回顾性分析2011年4月至2012年5月期间笔者所在科室收治的因胆囊结石合并胆管结石接受腹腔镜胆囊切除＋胆道探查治疗的109例患者的临床资料，其中58例行T管引流，51例行一期胆总管缝合。比较2组患者的手术时间、住院时间、治疗费用、术后恢复正常生活时间以及手术并发症情况。结果 T管引流组术后发生胆瘘2例（3.4%），一期缝合组术后发生胆瘘1例（2.0%），其差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。2组患者的手术时间、住院时间及住院治疗费用的差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。一期缝合组患者术后恢复正常生活时间为（7.2±1.1） d，短于T管引流组的（28.2±2.7）d（P=0.001）。结论 经腹腔镜胆道探查术后一期胆总管缝合是安全可行的，可缩短患者的康复时间，提高患者围手术期生活质量。
ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and common bile duct exploration(LCBDE) with biliary stent drainage or T tube drainage. MethodsThe clinical data of 68 cases of gallbladder and bile duct stones with the LCBDE by the same surgeon in our hospital from June 2008 to June 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. Twenty-two patients were treated with LCBDE and biliary stent drainage(stent drainage group), 46 patients were treated with LCBDE and T tube drainage(T tube drainage group). ResultsThe operation were successfully completed of 2 groups. The anal exhaust time, peritoneal drainage time, postoperative hospitalization time, and hospital expenses in stent drainage group were shorter or less than thoes T tube drainage group(P < 0.05). There were no significant difference in the operative time, postoperative bilirubin level, and incidences of postoperative complications between the two groups(P > 0.05). ConclusionsThe stent drainage and T tube drainage after LCBDE has its own indications. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and biliary stent drainage is superior to the laparo-scopic common bile duct exploration and T tube drainage.
目的比较腹腔镜下胆总管探查一期缝合与T管引流治疗肝外胆管结石的效果，总结腹腔镜下胆总管探查一期缝合的临床经验。 方法回顾性分析2010年1月至2012年12月期间于中国人民解放军总医院施行腹腔镜下胆总管探查取石的121例肝外胆管结石患者的临床资料，比较一期缝合组（n=63）与T管引流组（n=58）的手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间、胆瘘发生率、胆总管狭窄发生率及结石复发率。 结果2组患者均顺利完成腹腔镜手术。术后一期缝合组发生胆瘘3例，T管引流组发生1例。2组患者的术中出血量和胆瘘发生率比较差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05），但T管引流组的手术时间和术后住院时间均较长（P=0.000）。术后所有患者获访4～36个月，平均12个月。随访期间均无复发、胆总管狭窄及死亡发生。 结论腹腔镜下胆总管探查一期缝合治疗肝外胆管结石安全而有效，并且避免了术后T管的护理，有望成为处理肝外胆管结石的主流术式。
Objective To explore clinical effect of primary suture following laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) in treatment of patients aged over 70 years old with common bile duct (CBD) stones. Methods The clinical data of 62 patients aged over 70 years old with CBD stones underwent the LCBDE from January 2013 to December 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 30 patients underwent the T tube drainage (T tube drainage group) and 32 patients underwent the primary suture (primary suture group) following the LCBDE. The intraoperative and postoperative statuses of these two groups were compared. Results There were no significant differences in the gender, age, body mass index, preoperative comorbidities and ASA classification, number and maximum diameter of CBD stone, and diameter of CBD between the two groups (P>0.05). There were no significant differences in the operative time, hospitalization cost, rates of total postoperative complications and readmission between the two groups (P>0.05). Compared with the T tube drainage group, the amount of intraoperative bleeding was less (P<0.05) and the postoperative hospital stay was shorter (P<0.05) in the primary suture group. Conclusion Primary suture is safe and feasible following LCBDE for patients aged over 70 years old with CBD stones in case of strict indications and proficiency intraoperation and it is more beneficial to recovery of patient.