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(1978 to 2010), EMbase (1966 to 2010), CBMdisc (1978 to 2010), and CNKI (1979 to 2010); and the relevant published and unpublished data and their references were also searched by hand.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.
ObjectiveTo explore how to select the suitable indications of ERCP for clinical diagnosis and treatment. MethodsThe data of patients treated by ERCP between January 2005 and December 2009 in our hospital were analyzed retrospectively. ResultsTotal 221 patients received ERCP, among whom 99 (45%) cases of common bile duct stones, 44 (20%) cases of malignant tumor, 9 (4%) cases of papilla narrow, 45 (20%) cases were negative, and 24 (11%) cases were failed. It had the trend that the number of the patients received ERCP reduced year by year. The postoperative complication rate was 11% (25 cases), including 15 cases of postoperative pancreatitis, 3 cases of bleeding, 5 cases of biliary duct infection, and 2 cases of basket stranded. ConclusionIn the modern medical condition, with the advancement of image and laparoscopy technology, we should select the diagnosis and treatment methods with the principles of no damage or less damage for patients, without unlimitedly broadening the clinical indications of ERCP.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the value of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) on prevention of the complications in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). MethodsThe clinical data of 1 079 patients underwent LC from January 2006 to June 2010 in this hospital were retrospectively analyzed. According to the use of MRCP or not in the different period, the patients were divided into nonMRCP group (n=523) and MRCP group (n=556). The occurrence of bile duct injuries (BDI) and retained common duct stone (RCDS) were compared between two groups. ResultsConversion to open surgery was performed in 35 cases in nonMRCP group and in 41 cases in MRCP group. The intraoperative and postoperative BDI were found in five patients and RCDS were found in 27 patients in nonMRCP group, and those were not found in patients in MRCP group. The differences of BDI and RCDS of patients were significant between two groups (P=0.026 and P=0.000). In nonMRCP group, 23 of 55 patients were found common bile duct stones by intraoperative cholangiography. Common bile duct stones were found by intraoperative cholangiography other than preoperative MRCP in three patients in MRCP group, while another three patients did not find common bile duct stones by intraoperative cholangiography although preoperative MRCP suggested. By MRCP, double gallbladders were found in one patient, Mirizzi syndrome in eight patients, variant cystic duct in 34 patients, accessory hepatic duct in 28 patients, and complicating common bile duct stones in 27 patients in MRCP group, the diagnostic accuracy of those were 100%, 87.5%, 94.1%, 89.3% and 88.9%, respectively. ConclusionPreoperative MRCP is helpful to prevent BDI and RCDS for the patients with LC.
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.
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.
ObjectiveTo summarize experience of laparoscopy combined with choledochoscopy common bile duct exploration for patients with schistosomiasis liver cirrhosis with common bile duct stones. MethodThe clinical data of 45 patients with schistosomiasis liver cirrhosis combined with common bile duct stones (liver function Child-Pugh grade A and B) admitted in this hospital from September 2012 to September 2015 were analyzed retrospectively. ResultsTwenty cases were successfully treated by laparoscopy combined with choledochoscopy (laparoscope group), 25 cases were treated by conventional open common bile duct exploration (laparotomy group). Two cases were converted to laparotomy due to bleeding during laparoscopic operation. The mean operation time, intraoperative bleeding, postopera-tive hospitalization time, and postoperative total complications rate had no significant differences between these two groups (P>0.05). There were 2 cases of pulmonary infection and 1 case of incision infection in the laparoscope group, and 1 case of grade A bile leakage and 1 case of pulmonary infection in the laparotomy group, there was no common bile duct stone residual in these two groups. ConclusionAlthough laparoscopic surgery is more difficult for schistosomiasis liver cirrhosis combined with common bile duct stones patients, it is safe and feasible. Appropriate perioperative management and precise laparoscopic and choledochoscopic operation are key to success of operation.