Laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus common bile duct exploration for extrahepatic bile duct stones and postoperative recurrenceassociated risk factors

BACKGROUND There remain controversies regarding the surgical treatment of extrahepatic bile duct stones(EHBDSs)in clinical practice.AIM To explore the curative effect of laparoscopic cholecystectomy(LC)plus common bile duct exploration(CBDE)for the surgical treatment of EHBDSs and to analyze the risk factors that affect postoperative stone recurrence.METHODS Eighty-two patients with EHBDSs admitted between March 2017 and March 2023 were selected.Among them,patients treated with open choledocholithotomy plus LC or open cholecystectomy(OC)were set as the control group(n=40),and those treated with LC plus CBDE served as the observation group(n=42).The surgical outcomes of the two groups were compared,the surgical complications and Gas-trointestinal Quality of Life Index(GIQLI)scores were counted,and the one-year prognostic recurrence was recorded.Independent factors for postoperative re-currence were determined using univariate and multivariate analyses.RESULTS The two groups were comparable in the stone residual rate(P>0.05).The ope-ration time(P<0.05),intraoperative bleeding(P<0.05),and total complication rate(P=0.005)were lower in the observation group than in the control group.The observation group exhibited a marked increase in the GIQLI score,which was higher than the control group(P<0.05).A lower one-year recurrence rate was determined in the observation group vs the control group(P=0.027).Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction[odds ratio(OR)=5.712,P=0.007]and the treatment scheme of open choledocholithotomy plus LC or OC(OR=6.771,P=0.008)were the independent risk factors for one-year recurrence in patients after surgery.CONCLUSION LC plus CBDE for patients with EHBDSs can reduce stone residuals,intraoperative bleeding,complications,and postoperative recurrence.

Surgical strategies for challenging common bile duct stones in the endoscopic era: A comprehensive review of current evidence

While endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP)remains the primary treatment modality for common bile duct stones(CBDS)or choledocho-lithiasis due to advancements in instruments,surgical intervention,known as common bile duct exploration(CBDE),is still necessary in cases of difficult CBDS,failed endoscopic treatment,or altered anatomy.Recent evidence also supports CBDE in patients requesting single-step cholecystectomy and bile duct stone removal with comparable outcomes.This review elucidates relevant clinical anatomy,selection indications,and outcomes to enhance surgical understanding.The selection between trans-cystic(TC)vs trans-choledochal(TD)approaches is described,along with stone removal techniques and ductal closure.Detailed surgical techniques and strategies for both the TC and TD approaches,including instrument selection,is also provided.Additionally,this review comprehensively addresses operation-specific complications such as bile leakage,stricture,and entrapment,and focuses on preventive measures and treatment strategies.This review aims to optimize the management of CBDS through laparoscopic CBDE,with the goal of improving patient outcomes and minimizing risks.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration to treat choledocholithiasis in situs inversus patients:A technical review

Situs inversus(SI)is a rare congenital condition characterized by a mirror-image transposition of the major visceral organs.Since the 1990s,more than one hundred SI patients have been reported to have successfully undergone laparoscopic cholecystectomy.In these cases,the major problem is to overcome is the left-right condition for right-handed surgeons.Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration(LCBDE),an alternative to treat patients with bile duct stones,has shown equivalent efficacy and is less likely to cause pancreatitis than endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.Recent updated meta-analyses revealed that a shorter postoperative hospital stay,fewer procedural interventions,cost-effectiveness,a higher stone clearance rate,and fewer perioperative complications are additional advantages of LCBDE.However,the technique is technically demanding,even for skilled laparoscopic surgeons.Conducting LCBDE in patients with difficult situations,such as SI,is more complex than usual.We herein review published SI patients with choledocholithiasis treated by LCBDE,including our own experience,and this paper focuses on the technical aspects.

Role of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in the management of choledocholithiasis

Surgical fraternity has not yet arrived at any consensus for adequate treatment of choledocholithiasis. Sequential treatment in the form of pre-operative endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy(LC) is considered as optimal treatment till date. With refinements in technique and expertise in field of minimal access surgery, many centres in the world have started offering one stage management of choledocholithiasis by LC with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration(LCBDE). Various modalities have been tried for entering into concurrent common bile duct(CBD) [transcystic(TC) vs transcholedochal(TD)], for confirming stone clearance(intraoperative cholangiogram vs choledochoscopy), and for closure of choledochotomy(T-tube vs biliary stent vs primary closure) during LCBDE. Both TC and TD approaches are safe and effective. TD stone extraction is involved with an increased risk of bile leaks and requires more expertise in intra-corporeal suturing and choledochoscopy. Choice depends on number of stones, size of stone, diameter of cystic duct and CBD. This review article was undertaken to evaluate the role of LCBDE for the management of choledocholithiasis.

Various approaches of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus primary duct closure for choledocholithiasis:A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background： Common bile duct （CBD） stones may occur in up to 3%–14.7% of all patients with cholecystectomy.Various approaches of laparoscopic CBD exploration plus primary duct closure （PDC） are the most commonly used and the best methods to treat CBD stone. This systematic review was to comparethe effectiveness and safety of the various approaches of laparoscopic CBD exploration plus PDC forcholedocholithiasis

Outcomes of laparoscopic bile duct exploration for choledocholithiasis with small common bile duct

BACKGROUND Laparoscopic cholecystectomy(LC)combined with laparoscopic common bile duct(CBD)exploration(LCBDE)is one of the main treatments for choledocholithiasis with CBD diameter of larger than 10 mm.However,for patients with small CBD(CBD diameter≤8 mm),endoscopic sphincterotomy remains the preferred treatment at present,but it also has some drawbacks associated with a series of complications,such as pancreatitis,hemorrhage,cholangitis,and duodenal perforation.To date,few studies have been reported that support the feasibility and safety of LCBDE for choledocholithiasis with small CBD.AIM To investigate the feasibility and safety of LCBDE for choledocholithiasis with small CBD.METHODS A total of 257 patients without acute cholangitis who underwent LC+LCBDE for cholecystolithiasis from January 2013 to December 2018 in one institution were reviewed.The clinical data were retrospectively collected and analyzed.According to whether the diameter of CBD was larger than 8 mm,257 patients were divided into large CBD group(n=146)and small CBD group(n=111).Propensity score matching(1:1)was performed to adjust for clinical differences.The demographics,intraoperative data,short-term outcomes,and long-term follow-up outcomes for the patients were recorded and compared.RESULTS In total,257 patients who underwent successful LC+LCBDE were enrolled in the study,146 had large CBD and 111 had small CBD.The median follow-up period was 39(14-86)mo.For small CBD patients,the median CBD diameter was 0.6 cm(0.2-2.0 cm),the mean operating time was 107.2±28.3 min,and the postoperative bile leak rate,rate of residual CBD stones(CBDS),CBDS recurrence rate,and CBD stenosis rate were 5.41%(6/111),3.60%(4/111),1.80%(2/111),and 0%(0/111),respectively;the mean postoperative hospital stay was 7.4±3.6 d.For large CBD patients,the median common bile duct diameter was 1.0 cm(0.3-3.0 cm),the mean operating time was 115.7±32.0 min,and the postoperative bile leak rate,rate of residual CBDS,CBDS recurrence rate,and CBD stenosis rate were 5.41%(9/146),1.37%(2/146),6.85%(10/146),and 0%(0/146),respectively;the mean postoperative hospital stay was 7.7±2.7 d.After propensity score matching,184 patients remained,and all preoperative covariates except diameter of CBD stones were balanced.Postoperative bile leak occurred in 11 patients overall(5.98%),and no difference was found between the small CBD group(4.35%,4/92)and the large CBD group(7.61%,7/92).The incidence of CBDS recurrence did not differ significantly between the small CBD group(2.17%,2/92)and the large CBD group(6.52%,6/92).CONCLUSION LC+LCBDE is safe and feasible for choledocholithiasis patients with small CBD and did not increase the postoperative bile leak rate compared with choledocholithiasis patients with large CBD.

Laparoscopic hepatic left lateral lobectomy combined with fiber choledochoscopic exploration of the common bile duct and traditional open operation

AIM: To investigate the possibilities and advantages of laparoscopic hepatic left lateral lobectomy combined with fiber choledochoscopic exploration of the common bile duct compaired with traditional open operation.METHODS: Laparoscopic hepatic left lateral lobectomy combined with fiber choledochoscopic exploration of the common bile duct and traditional open operation were performed in two groups of patients who had gallstones in the left lobe of liver and in the common bile duct. The hospitalization time, hospitalization costs, operation time, operative complications and post-operative liver functions of the two groups of patients were studied.RESULTS: The operation time and post-operative liver functions of the two groups of patients had no significant differences, while the hospitalization time, hospitalization costs and operative complications of the laparoscopic hepatic left lateral lobectomy combined with fiber choledochoscopic exploration in the common bile duct group were significantly lower than those in the traditional open operation group.CONCLUSION: For patients with gallstones in the left lobe of liver and in the common bile duct, laparoscopic hepatic left lateral lobectomy combined with fiber choledochoscopic exploration of the common bile duct can significantly shorten the hospitalization time, reduce the hospitalization costs and the post-operative complications,without prolonging the operation time and bringing about more liver function damages compared with traditional open operation. This kind of operation has more advantages than traditional open operation.

Clinical Application of Primary Suture Following Three-Port Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration: A Report of 176 Cases

Objective: To investigate the feasibility, safety and the clinical value of primary suture following 3-port laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Methods: From January 2012 to September 2014, 176 patients suffered from choledocholithiasis were treated with primary suture following 3-port LCBDE and the clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. Results: All cases were operated successfully and none was converted to open surgery. The duration of operation was 92.2 ± 18.8 min and the length of postoperative hospital stay was 4.4 ± 3.7 d. Postoperative bile leakage occurred in 2 cases and these patients recovered by simple drainage for 3 to 7 days without re-operation. All patients recovered smoothly without any serious complications. Conclusions: Primary suture following 3-port LCBDE is safe, effective and mini-invasive, which is worthy of further clinical application.

Hem-o-lok clip migration to the common bile duct after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration:A case report

BACKGROUND Laparoscopic cholecystectomy(LC)and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration(LCBDE)has been widely used for management of gallbladder and common bile duct(CBD)stones.Post-operative clip migration is a rare complication of laparoscopic biliary surgery,which can serve as a nidus for stone formation and cause recurrent cholangitis.CASE SUMMARY A 59-year-old female was admitted to hospital because of fever and acute right upper abdominal pain.She has a history of LC and had a LCBDE surgery 2 mo ago.Physical examination revealed tenderness in the upper quadrant of right abdomen.Computed tomography scan demonstrated a high-density shadow at the distal CBD,which was considered as migrated clips.The speculation was confirmed by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography examination,and two displaced Hem-o-lok clips were removed with a stone basket.No fever or abdominal pain presented after the operation.In addition to the case report,literature regarding surgical clip migration after laparoscopic biliary surgery was reviewed and discussed.CONCLUSION Incidence of postoperative clip migration may be reduced by using clips properly and correctly;however,new methods should be explored to occlude cystic duct and vessels.If a patient with a past history of LC or LCBDE presents with features of sepsis and recurrent upper quadrant pain,clip migration must be considered as one of the differential diagnosis.

Two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones

AIM:To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of twostage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones.METHODS:Four databases,including PubMed,Embase,the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Science Citation Index up to September 2011,were searched to identify all randomized controlled trials(RCTs).Data were extracted from the studies by two independent reviewers.The primary outcomes were stone clearance from the common bile duct,postoperative morbidity and mortality.The secondary outcomes were conversion to other procedures,number of procedures per patient,length of hospital stay,total operative time,hospitalization charges,patient acceptance and quality of life scores.RESULTS:Seven eligible RCTs [five trials(n = 621) comparing preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP)/endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST) + laparoscopic cholecystectomy(LC) with LC + laparoscopic common bile duct exploration(LCBDE);two trials(n = 166) comparing postoperative ERCP/EST + LC with LC + LCBDE],composed of 787 patients in total,were included in the final analysis.The metaanalysis detected no statistically significant difference between the two groups in stone clearance from the common bile duct [risk ratios(RR) =-0.10,95% confidence intervals(CI):-0.24 to 0.04,P = 0.17],postoperative morbidity(RR = 0.79,95% CI:0.58 to 1.10,P = 0.16),mortality(RR = 2.19,95% CI:0.33 to 14.67,P = 0.42),conversion to other procedures(RR = 1.21,95% CI:0.54 to 2.70,P = 0.39),length of hospital stay(MD = 0.99,95% CI:-1.59 to 3.57,P = 0.45),total operative time(MD = 12.14,95% CI:-1.83 to 26.10,P = 0.09).Two-stage(LC + ERCP/EST) management clearly required more procedures per patient than single-stage(LC + LCBDE) management.CONCLUSION:Single-stage management is equivalent to two-stage management but requires fewer procedures.However,patient's condition,operator's expertise and local resources should be taken into account in making treatment decisions.

Single-session minimally invasive management of common bile duct stones

Up to 18% of patients submitted to cholecystectomy had concomitant common bile duct stones.To avoid serious complications,these stones should be removed.There is no consensus about the ideal management strategy for such patients.Traditionally,open surgery was offered but with the advent of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy(LC) minimally invasive approach had nearly replaced laparotomy because of its well-known advantages.Minimally invasive approach could be done in either twosession(preoperative ERCP followed by LC or LC followed by postoperative ERCP) or single-session(laparoscopic common bile duct exploration or LC with intraoperative ERCP).Most recent studies have found that both options are equivalent regarding safety and efficacy but the singlesession approach is associated with shorter hospital stay,fewer procedures per patient,and less cost.Consequently,single-session option should be offered to patients with cholecysto-choledocholithiaisis provided that local resources and expertise do exist.However,the management strategy should be tailored according to many variables,such as available resources,experience,patient characteristics,clinical presentations,and surgical pathology.

LC+LERV与LC+LCBDE治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床效果比较

目的通过对比分析腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)+腹腔镜术中联合内镜(LERV)与LC+腹腔镜胆总管切开取石(LCBDE)对胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床疗效,探讨两种手术方式的临床应用价值。方法前瞻性分析2021年12月至2023年5月江油市人民医院和潍坊市人民医院收治的110例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者的临床资料,按随机数字表法分为LC+LERV组(n=54)和LC+LCBDE组(n=56),对两组患者的手术成功率、术中出血量、手术时间、引流管留置时间、术后并发症、疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、平均住院时间以及住院费用进行比较分析。结果与LC+LCBDE组相比,LC+LERV组手术成功率较低[47(87.04%)vs 56(100.00%),χ2=7.467,P=0.006],手术时间较长[(112.0±15.6)min vs(98.0±21.5)min,t=3.771,P<0.001],但引流管留置时间明显较短[(2.34±0.66)d vs(7.41±12.88)d,t=-2.693,P=0.008],两组比较差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组在术中出血量、术后并发症发生率方面比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组在术前、术后6 h、术后1 d及出院日VAS评分差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但术后3 d LC+LCBDE组VAS评分高于LC+LERV组(P<0.05)。两组平均住院时间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但LC+LERV组平均住院费用明显高于LC+LCBDE组[(25653.6±3317.0)元vs(17978.4±2158.0)元,t=14.219,P<0.001]。结论在治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石方面,LC+LCBDE和LC+LERV安全性上表现一致,LC+LERV术后舒适性更佳,但LC+LCBDE在治疗有效性、经济效率性方面更好,且LC+LCBDE可作为LC+LERV插管或取石失败后的补救术式。根据具体病情个性化选择手术方式,有利优势互补,获得最佳治疗效果。

腹腔镜胆总管探查一期缝合术适应证及胆漏防治4100例临床经验

目的探讨腹腔镜胆总管探查(LCBDE)一期缝合适应证及胆漏并发症防治技术。方法回顾性分析2000年1月至2023年8月我院收治的4100例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石行LCBDE一期缝合术患者的临床资料,包括病例纳入标准、技术方法及胆漏并发症的防治经验。结果4100例LCBDE一期缝合术均顺利完成,无中转开腹。术后3991例(97.34%)恢复顺利,109例(2.66%)发生胆漏。其中101例(2.46%)漏胆不伴腹膜炎50~200 ml/d,乳胶管引流1~2周自愈,8例(0.19%)胆漏伴腹膜炎再次手术胆总管置T管及腹腔引流术,本组无死亡病例。结论胆总管结石采用LCBDE一期缝合术的方法是安全有效而且有优势的选择术式。

LCBDE术中一期缝合与T管引流的术后胆漏发生率比较

目的比较腹腔镜胆总管探查术中(LCBDE)行一期缝合和T管引流的术后胆漏发生率,并分析术后胆漏的危险因素。方法回顾性分析2015年1月至2022年11月于温州医科大学附属第一医院行LCBDE的患者资料,分为一期缝合组和T管引流组,采用Logistic多因素回归分别分析两组发生胆漏的危险因素。对两组中有肝内结石、上段胆总管结石、最大结石直径、体温最高值和中性粒细胞百分比5项指标进行倾向性评分匹配(PSM)后,比较两组胆漏发生率。结果共纳入患者1052例,其中143例患者发生术后胆漏,发生率为13.5%。Logistic多因素回归分析显示年龄>60岁为一期缝合组(n=506)胆漏的危险因素(OR=2.242,95%CI 1.300-4.038,P=0.005),主刀医师实施LCBDE少于10例为T管引流组(n=546)胆漏的危险因素(OR=3.525,95%CI 1.469-7.996,P=0.003)。经PSM成功匹配383对患者,一期缝合组胆漏发生率较T管引流组高[15.1%(58/383)vs 9.9%(38/383),P=0.029]。结论患者年龄>60岁是行LCBDE术中一期缝合后发生胆漏的独立危险因素,医师经验不足(主刀医师实施LCBDE少于10例)是行留置T管后发生胆漏的独立危险因素。相较于一期缝合,留置T管引流可以降低LCBDE术后胆漏的发生率。

探讨腹腔镜胆总管探查术治疗复杂性肝胆结石的安全性及对患者生存质量的影响

目的探讨复杂性肝胆结石开展腹腔镜胆总管探查术治疗的安全性及可行性。方法从复杂性肝胆结石患者中抽取92例开展研究,以奇偶数字法分为对照组(n=46)和观察组(n=46)。对照组开展开腹胆总管探查术治疗,观察组开展腹腔镜胆总管探查术治疗。比较两组围手术期相关指标、各阶段血清应激反应指标、胆红素水平、机体炎症水平以及生存质量。结果观察组手术所需时间(160.30±19.83)min、术后住院所需时间(11.70±2.08)d均短于对照组的(213.26±28.70)min、(16.21±3.10)d,术中出血量(57.92±15.11)ml少于对照组的(89.53±17.31)ml,并发症发生率4.35%小于对照组的17.39%(P<0.05)。两组术前血清应激反应指标比较无显著差异(P>0.05);术后5 d观察组丙二醛(MDA)(4.03±1.15)μmol/L、氧化型低密度脂蛋白(ox-LDL)(62.76±4.15)μg/L均低于对照组的(5.98±1.52)μmol/L、(73.09±5.30)μg/L,对氧磷酶1(PON-1)(112.71±11.56)U/L高于对照组的(101.91±9.36)U/L(P<0.05)。两组术前体内胆红素水平比较无显著差异(P>0.05);术后5 d观察组直接胆红素(DBil)、总胆红素(TBil)、间接胆红素(IBil)水平分别为(17.31±2.30)、(25.15±1.97)、(25.50±1.18)μmol/L,均低于对照组的(21.41±2.63)、(31.80±2.02)、(30.23±2.95)μmol/L(P<0.05)。两组术前机体炎症水平比较无显著差异(P>0.05);术后5 d观察组IL-6、CRP分别为(63.35±7.38)ng/ml、(21.35±0.47)mg/L,均低于对照组的(81.57±9.43)ng/ml、(49.78±0.52)mg/L,IL-10(37.52±8.21)pg/ml高于对照组的(31.89±5.36)pg/ml(P<0.05)。两组术前生存质量各维度评分比较无显著差异(P>0.05);术后3个月观察组自觉症状、躯体生理功能、生理情绪状况、日常功能评分分别为(3.12±0.49)、(3.01±0.27)、(3.20±0.30)、(3.16±0.28)分,均高于对照组的(2.02±0.69)、(2.38±0.12)、(2.17±0.28)、(2.75±0.40)分(P<0.05)。结论对复杂性肝胆结石开展腹腔镜胆总管探查术具备较高的安全性,该手术方法对患者术后应激反应、机体炎性影响较轻,有助于胆红素恢复至正常水平,促进预后。

腹腔镜下胆囊切除术联合腹腔镜下胆总管探查术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者疗效研究

目的探讨腹腔镜下胆囊切除术(LC)联合腹腔镜下胆总管探查术(LCBD)治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者的疗效。方法2018年3月~2022年5月我院诊治的胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者85例,均接受LC联合LCBDE手术治疗,其中42例观察组采用经鼻胆管引流,另43例对照组采用T管引流。应用胃肠道生活质量指数(GIQLI)问卷评估生活质量。结果观察组引流管拔除时间和医疗花费分别为(5.6±1.8)d和(3.5±0.5)万元,均显著短于或少于对照组[分别为(50.5±6.8)d和(3.9±0.7)万元,P<0.05];在术后1 w,观察组血清ALT和AST水平分别为(37.1±14.6)U/L和(36.7±16.8)U/L,均显著低于对照组【分别为(79.7±13.8)U/L和(53.5±14.7)U/L,P<0.05】;在术后1个月,观察组GIQLI评分为(98.5±3.3)分,显著高于对照组【(81.4±3.9)分,P<0.05】;术后观察组肝功能异常发生率为40.5%,显著低于对照组的65.1%(P<0.05),而两组胆漏、胰腺炎、胆总管结石残留和出血发生率比较,无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论在采用LC联合LCBDE术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者时放置鼻胆管引流可能是一种技术进步,可免除T管引流对患者术后生活质量的干扰,对维持正常的消化功能也有积极的意义。

胰管支架置入对急性胆源性胰腺炎患者预后及并发症的影响

目的分析急性胆源性胰腺炎(ABP)患者应用胰管支架置入治疗对预后及并发症的影响。方法选取2019年1月至2022年12月收治的300例ABP患者,按治疗方法不同分组,A组100例行鼻胆管引流治疗,B组100例行开腹胆总管探查联合T型管引流术治疗,C组100例行鼻胆管引流联合胰管支架置入治疗,对比3组肝功能、并发症、死亡率及恢复情况。结果B组术后总胆红素(TBIL)、天冬酸氨基转移酶(AST)、丙氨酸氨基转移酶(ALT)水平低于A组(P<0.05);C组术后TBIL、AST、ALT水平低于A组和B组(P<0.05);B组恢复进食时间、体温恢复时间、住院时间较A组更短(P<0.05);C组恢复进食时间、腹痛消失时间、体温恢复时间及住院时间短于A组和B组(P<0.05);C组并发症发生率4.00%低于A组的12.00%(P<0.05);C组1.00%死亡率低于A组8.00%(P<0.05)。结论ABP患者应用胰管支架置入治疗,可有缩短患者恢复时间,有利于改善肝功能,死亡率低,且并发症少。

腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术一期缝合在老年肝外胆管结石治疗中的效果及安全性评价

目的 探讨腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术一期缝合在老年肝外胆管结石治疗中的效果及安全性。方法 选取老年肝外胆管结石患者148例为研究对象。所有患者均行腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术,其中88例行一期缝合(一期缝合组),60例做常规T管引流(常规组)。比较2组的手术相关指标、炎症因子水平变化、术后胃肠功能恢复情况以及并发症发生率。结果 一期缝合组的手术时间、术后引流时间、住院时间以及首次排气时间和肠鸣音恢复时间短于常规组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。2组术中出血量、治疗总有效率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。与术前相比,2组术后的C反应蛋白(CRP)、肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)、白细胞介素-1β(IL-1β)、丙氨酸转氨酶(ALT)、天冬氨酸转氨酶(AST)和总胆红素(TBIL)水平均呈先升后降低的变化趋势,不同时点差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。一期缝合组术后1、2 d的血清CRP、TNF-α、IL-1β水平低于常规组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。一期缝合组的术后并发症总发生率为3.41%,低于常规组的11.67%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。2组术后3个月内的胆总管狭窄发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术一期缝合在老年肝外胆管结石患者治疗中的应用效果较好,有助于缩短手术时间,减轻炎症反应,降低术后并发症发生率,且安全性较高。

2种方法治疗胆囊结石并胆总管结石的临床分析

目的比较腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)+腹腔镜胆总管探查一期缝合术(LBEPS)及LC+腹腔镜经胆囊管胆总管探查术(LTCBDE)2种术式的临床治疗效果。方法回顾性分析2018年1月至2023年6月昆明医科大学第二附属医院肝胆胰外科收治的64例采用LC+LBEPS及LC+LTCBDE治疗的胆囊结石并胆总管结石患者的临床资料,其中35例行LC+LBEPS,29例行LC+LTCBDE,比较2组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、腹腔引流时间、手术成功率、总住院时间、总住院费用、手术并发症发生率及结石复发率。结果2组患者基线资料、手术成功率及术后并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);LC+LBEPS组手术时间[160.00(150.00,167.50)]min vs[114.00(95.00,126.00)]min、术中出血量[30.00(27.40,40.00)]mL vs[22.00(20.00,25.00)]mL、腹腔引流时间[5.00(5.00,6.00)]d vs[3.00(3.00,4.00)]d、总住院时间(8.31±1.98)d vs(6.14±2.07)d及总住院费用[2.82(2.32,3.44)]万元vs[1.68(1.61,1.86)]万元均高于LC+LTCBDE组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论LC+LBEPS及LC+LTCBDE均是治疗胆囊结石并胆总管结石的2种免T管有效治疗方式,但LC+LTCBDE手术时间、术中出血量、腹腔引流时间、总住院时间、总住院费用更低,临床治疗效果更优,在满足手术适应症的前提下可优先选择。

经皮经肝胆道镜取石术在复发性胆总管结石中的应用研究

目的:探讨经皮经肝胆道镜取石术治疗复发性胆总管结石的临床疗效。方法:收集2020年6月至2023年6月行胆道手术治疗的83例复发性胆总管结石患者的临床资料,其中40行经皮经肝胆道镜取石术(PTCS),43例行腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术(LCBDE),对比分析两组手术效果与术后恢复情况。结果:PTCS组成功完成39例,1例中转LCBDE,中转率2.5%(1/40)。两组一般资料、总手术时间、术中出血量、胆总管直径、结石数量、最大结石直径、术后胃肠道生活质量指数、术后除中性粒细胞以外的实验室检查结果、T管引流量(除第3天)、并发症发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。PTCS组超声定位以外的手术操作时间、第3年总手术时间、术后镇痛例数、术后恢复进食时间、疼痛评分、住院时间、术后住院费用、导管滑脱风险、术后中性粒细胞、术后第3天T管引流量少于LCBDE组(P<0.05)。结论:PTCS与LCBDE治疗复发性胆总管结石均是可行的,与LCBDE相比,PTCS在微创方面更具优势。