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.
Endoscopic treatment of extrahepatic bile duct stones has become very common, but endoscopic treatment of intrahepatic bile duct stones for various reasons faces many difficulties and challenges. With the birth of new equipment and the advancement of technology, endoscopic treatment of intrahepatic bile duct stones has ushered in new opportunities, including peroral cholangioscopic technology and endoscopic ultrasonography, which have shown good application prospects. It will become an indispensable and important part in the treatment of intrahepatic bile duct stones.
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.
ObjectiveTo explore the effect of preoperative jaundice on the complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with intraoperative biliary stone removal in patients with common bile duct stones.MethodsA total of 104 patients with choledocholithiasis who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with intraoperative biliary stone removal for common bile duct stones in Baishui County Hospital and No.215 Hospital of Shaanxi Nuclear Industry between January 2014 and February 2016 were enrolled and retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into the jaundice group (43 cases) and the jaundice-free control group (control group, 61 cases) according to the preoperative serum total bilirubin level. The differences in postoperative complication rates between the two groups were compared and risk factors affecting postoperative complications were explored.ResultsThe ALT and total bilirubin on the first day after operation in the jaundice group were higher than those in the control group (P<0.05). In addition, the hospital stay in the jaundice group was shorter than that of the control group (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of total postoperative complication rate and the incidence of complications (included biliary leakage, ballistic hemorrhage, hyperthermia, incision complications, and other complications) between the two groups (P>0.05). There were no significant differences in Clavien-Dindo classification, comprehensive complication index (CCI), and ratio of CCI≥20 (P>0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that male and residual stones were independently associated with postoperative complications (P<0.05), but there was no statistical correlation between preoperative jaundice and postoperative complications (P>0.05).ConclusionPreoperative jaundice does not increase the risk of complications after acute laparoscopic surgery in patients with common bile duct stones.
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.
Four hundred and eighty two paients suffering from intrahepatic bile duct stone undergoing lobectomy and segmental resection (from 1975 to 1994,9) has reported. 63% of the patient in this group underwent 1-5 operations, including different types of biliary-intestinal anastomosis (21.6%). 482 cases underwent different types of hepatectomy, including left lateral-lobetomy 321 cases (66.6%),left hemihepatectomy 80 cases(16.6%), right hemihepatectomy 19 cases (3.9%), and multiple segmental resections 39 cases (8.1%, including Ⅴ+Ⅷ 11 cases, Ⅵ+Ⅶ 28 cases). Other type hepatectomy combined with guadrate lobectomy 20 cases (4.1%). Postoperative complication rate was 10.2%, including diliary fistula. hemobilia and subdiaphragmatic and resectional surface infectioin, 85% of the patients were followed up with an excellent result of 88%. The authors emphsize that hepatic lobectomy nad segmental resection is the core of treatment and selection of operative methods depends on clinical-patholigic types of the disease.
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.
Objective To investigate the recurrence of intrahepatic bile duct stones and study the relations to the primary intrahepatic stones.Methods One hundred and twenty nine patients who experienced complete lithotomy were followed up for 2-10 years. Results Thirty five cases had the recurrence of intrahepatic stones at 49 sites (27.13%). The recurrent stones were found at following sites: 13 at left duct, 12 right duct , 8 left medial segment, 6 right anterior segment, 4 right posterior segment, 3 left lateral segment, 3 caudate. Nine cases were asymptomic, 16 cases had slight symptoms and 10 cases suffered from the serious attacks of stones. The time of recurrence was from 2 to 9 years (5.49±2.25 years) after surgery. The recurrent rate was 27.13% in our group. Conclusion The recurrence of intrahepatic stones also developed at several sites in the liver. The recurrence of intrahepatic stones had a tendency to develop at the primary sites. The recurrence of intrahepatic stones may be asymptomic and most patients suffered from slight attack. Liver resection is the best way to prevent the recurrence from intrahepatic stones.
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.
Objective To evaluate safety, efficacy, and indications of laparoscopic bile duct reexploration in treatment of bile duct stones. Methods Fifty-seven patients with bile duct stones who underwent laparoscopic common bile duct reexploration (laparoscope group) and 62 patients with bile duct stones who underwent open common bile duct reexploration (laparotomy group) were included into this study from February 2013 to February 2017 in the Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University. The intraoperative and postoperative data of the patients were documented and analyzed. Results All the operations were performed successfully and all the patients had no extra-damage during the operation. One case was converted to the laparotomy due to the intraabdominal serious adhesion in the laparoscope group. Compared with the laparotomy group, the amount of intraoperative blood loss was less, the first time of anal exhaust was earlier, the rates of postoperative analgesia and incision infection were lower, and the length of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscope group, there were significant differences (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the operative time, the hospitalization expense, primary suture rate of common bile duct, and the rates of postoperative complications such as the bile leakage, bile duct stricture, and residual stone between the laparoscope group and the laparotomy group (P>0.05). Conclusion With experienced skills and strict surgical indications, laparoscopic common bile duct reexploration is safe and effective in treatment of bile duct stones, and it has some advantages including less bleeding, rapid recovery, and shorter hospitalization time.