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 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 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.
ObjectiveTo summarize recent progress of minimally invasive diagnosis and treatment of patients with choledocholithiasis.Method The literatures relevant to progress of minimally invasive diagnosis and treatment of patients with choledocholithiasis at home and abroad in recent years were summarized and reviewed. ResultsThe preoperative diagnosis of patients with choledocholithiasis was very important, and it still needed to combine with the clinical symptoms, biochemical indicators, and imaging examination and so on. Combined or single application of laparoscopy, endoscopy, biliary endoscopy to reflect their respective advantages in the treatment of choledocholithiasis, it had become the most important minimally invasive treatment method. ConclusionEarly diagnosis and proper minimally invasive approach are important for good therapeutic efficacy, and realize modern surgical idea for damage control and rapid recovery.
ObjectiveTo compare the effect of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) in the treatment of cholecystolithiasis combined with choledocholithiasis in elderly patients and non-elderly patients. MethodsThe clinical data of 185 cases of cholecystolithiasis combined with choledocholithiasis who treated in our hospital from September 2010 to November 2015 were analyzed retrospectively. Then the 185 cases of holecystolithiasis combined with choledocholithiasis were divided into elderly patients group (n=74) and the non-elderly patients group (n=111). The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative exhaust time, postoperative activity time, abdominal drainage time, postoperative hospital stay, total hospital stay, hospitalization cost, incidence of complications, unplanned analgesia, stone-free rate, rate of conversion to laparotomy, recurrence of stone, and mortality were compared between the two groups. Results① Intraoperative and postoperative indexes. No significant difference was noted in operative time and intraoperative blood loss (P > 0.050), but the postoperative exhaust time, postoperative activity time, abdominal drainage time, postoperative hospital stay, total hospital stay, hospitalization cost, and ratio of indwelling T tube of elderly patients group were all higher or longer than corresponding index of non-elderly patients group (P < 0.050). ② Postoperative complications and unplanned analgesia. There was no striking discrepancy in incidence of complications (including biliary leakage, peritonitis, haemorrhage, vomit, ectoralgia, and fever), and Clavien-Dindo grade (P > 0.050), except unplanned analgesia (P=0.007), the rate of unplanned analgesia in elderly patients group was higher than that of non-elderly patients group. ③Surgical effect. There was no significant difference in the stone-free rate, rate of conversion to laparotomy, and rate of recurrence of stone between the 2 groups (P > 0.050). ConclusionLC+LCBDE is also safe and effective in treatment of cholecystolithiasis combined with choledocholithiasis in elderly patients, it's worthy to be expanded and be used broadly.