目的:探讨腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)与内镜十二指肠乳头括约肌切开术(EST)联合应用治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床效果。方法:回顾性分析我院开展的LC联合EST治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石76例,其中56例先行EST后行LC,20例先行LC后行ERCP/EST。结果:本组全部治愈,先行EST组56例,3例并发胰腺炎,3例出血,2例再发胆总管结石,先行LC组20例行EST11例,6例取石后未做括约肌切开,3例结石自行掉入肠道,1例出现胆道感染,1例胰腺炎,无出血及穿孔。结论:内镜治疗胆囊结石继发胆总管结石具有创伤小、效果好、并发症少、恢复快的的特点;先作EST可解除胆道梗阻、减轻炎症,并为LC创造条件,选择性先行LC后可减轻创伤,甚至不必做EST。
ObjectiveTo systematically review the effectiveness and safety of transurethral ureteroscopy lithotripsy in the treatment of upper ureteral calculi. MethodsWe electronically searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2013), PubMed (1966 to 2013.8), EMbase (1990 to 2013.8), CNKI (1949 to 2013.9), CBM (1978 to 2013.9), VIP (1989 to 2013.8) and WanFang Data (1990 to 2013.8) for the randomized controlled studies (RCTs) related to retroperitoneoscopy ureterolithotomy versus transurethral ureteroscopy lithotripsy for upper ureteral calculi. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and evaluated methodological quality of included studies. Then meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of 16 RCTs involving 1 410 patients (transurethral ureteroscopy lithotripsy:747 cases; etroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy:663 cases) were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, transurethral ureteroscopy lithotripsy was lower than retroperitoneoscopy ureterolithotomy in success rates of surgery (OR=0.26, 95%CI 0.14 to 0.51), 3-day stone clearance rates (OR=0.06, 95%CI 0.03 to 0.11), and 1-month stone clearance rates (OR=0.21, 95%CI 0.08 to 0.53), while it showed superiority in operation time (MD=-22.35, 95%CI-35.29 to-9.41) and postoperative hospital stay (MD=-1.84, 95%CI-3.44 to-0.24). ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that, in the treatment of upper ureteral calculi, transurethral ureteroscopy lithotripsy causes less operation time and postoperative hospital stay, but it had no advantage in success rates of surgery, 3-day stone clearance rates, and 1-month stone clearance rates.
ObjectiveTo summarize experience of endoscopic reverse biliary tract stent placement via choledochus in treatment of situs inversus totalis complicated with choledocholithiasis.MethodThe clinical data of one patient with situs inversus totalis complicated with choledocholithiasis in the Department of Tumor Surgery of Lanzhou University Second Hospital were retrospectively analyzed.ResultsThe ERCP was failed at the first admission, followed by the cholecystectomy plus choledocholithotomy plus T-tube drainage, the stones were removed. Two months later, choledochoscopy revealed multiple choledocholithiasis, then the holmium laser lithotripsy and bile duct stent placement was performed at the secondary admission, the postoperative recovery was good, it had been more than 2 months after the surgery, no stone recurrence occurred.ConclusionEndoscopic reverse biliary tract stent placement via choledochus is feasible, which can be used as an option for treatment of patient with situs inversus totalis complicated with choledocholithiasis.
目的 探讨腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术的优势，总结手术操作经验及常见并发症的预防与处理。方法回顾性分析我院1999年6月至2010年4月期间收治的108 例胆管结石患者行腹腔镜胆总管探查取石术的手术方法、操作要点及并发症的处理。结果 腹腔镜手术成功 105例, 中转开腹3例; 手术时间（120±20） min,出血量（25±5） ml,住院时间（9±1） d; 术后发生胆道出血3例,漏胆7 例,残余结石6 例; 全组无死亡病例。结论 腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术具有创伤小、痛苦轻、恢复快、对腹腔脏器干扰小、住院时间短等优点，值得临床推广。
目的比较腹腔镜胆囊切除联合胆总管探查术（LC＋LCBDE）与内镜下Oddi括约肌切开取石联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术（EST＋LC）治疗胆囊结石合并肝外胆管结石的临床疗效。 方法回顾性分析45例行LC＋LCBDE及60例行EST＋LC患者的临床资料，观察2组在单次结石清除率、中转手术率、手术并发症、住院时间等指标方面的效果。 结果2组患者的基线资料相近，无手术死亡病例；2组术后并发症发生情况的差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；LC＋LCBDE组单次治疗成功率高于EST＋LC组，而住院时间及中转手术率则短于或低于EST＋LC组（P＜0.05）。 结论LC＋LCBDE是治疗胆囊结石合并肝外胆管结石患者安全有效的方法。
目的 探讨腹腔镜下联合胆道镜微创保胆取石术治疗胆囊结石的疗效。方法 解放军第452医院普外科2005年1月至2010年1月期间行腹腔镜保胆取石术治疗胆囊结石患者70例，与同期行腹腔镜胆囊切除术的患者对比，观察2组的手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间、住院费用及术后饮食恢复时间。结果 在术中出血量及术后饮食恢复时间上，保胆取石组明显少于或短于胆囊切除组（P＜0.05）；在手术时间、术后住院时间及住院费用上2组间差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论 相比胆囊切除术，腹腔镜联合胆道镜保胆取石术创伤较小且恢复较快，但是保胆取石术后结石的复发有待长期观察和研究。
目的 探讨纤维胆道镜在肝胆管结石手术术中及术后的操作技巧，提高肝胆管结石的临床治愈率。方法 总结分析180例肝胆管结石病例，在纤维胆道镜下观察，使用取石篮取石、钳咬、抓取、冲洗，行术中、术后经T管窦道取出结石。结果 本组180例中158例行术中取石，结石取净率为94.3%（149/158）； 余22例系术后再次经Ｔ管窦道取石，结石取净率为86.4%（19/22）。术中、术后取净结石共168例，结石取净率93.3%（168/180）。结论 纤维胆道镜能有效治疗肝胆管结石，降低术中、术后残余结石发生率，提高治愈率。
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of the third-generation super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP) for the treatment of kidney calculi with diameter of ≤2.5 cm and CT value of ≥700 Hu, and discuss the feasibility of adopting the technology in primary hospitals.MethodsThe clinical data of 64 patients with unilateral kidney calculi (CT value ≥700 Hu, diameter ≤2.5 cm) treated in the People’s Hospital of Leshan Central District between July 2017 and July 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. After random assignment, 30 patients were treated with SMP and 34 were with mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL). The pre-, intra-, and post-operative data were compared and analyzed to evaluate the efficacy and safety.ResultsThe unilateral lesion operations of both groups were successfully completed in the first phase. All patients were given double J tubes after operation, and there were no major complications such as post-operative hemorrhage and sepsis. There was no statistically significant difference in the post-operative hemoglobin decrease, post-operative immediate stone removal rate, post-operative stone removal rate after one month, or the rate of procalcitonin >0.1 μg/L between the two groups (P>0.05). The differences in the lithotripsy time [(29.63±6.28) vs. (25.21±5.19) minutes], post-operative hospital stay [(5.33±0.61) vs. (9.44±0.96) days], rate of indwelling renal fistula (3.3% vs. 50.0%), analgesic demand rate (10.0% vs. 58.8%), and postoperative infectious fever rate (6.7% vs. 26.5%) between SMP group and MPCNL group were statistically significant (P<0.05).ConclusionsSMP has the advantages of less trauma, low systemic inflammatory response syndrome incidence, less pain, quick rehabilitation, short hospital stay, tubeless after surgery, etc. It is worthy of extensive promotion in primary hospitals.
ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) versus ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URL) in the treatment of impacted proximal ureteral stones>1 cm. MethodsWe electronically searched PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, WanFang, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure and VIP database (by the end of July 2015) to collect randomized controlled trials involving PCNL vs. URL for the treatment of impacted proximal ureteral stones> 1 cm. The quality of those trials were assessed. Data were extracted and analyzed with RevMan 5.3 software. ResultsSix randomized controlled trials were finally obtained after screening. A total of 487 patients were included for a Meta-analysis. The results showed that, as compared with the control group (URL), the patients in the trial group (PCNL) had the following features: ① There was a remarkable improvement of stone clearance rate [RR=1.20, 95% CI (1.09, 1.33), P=0.000 3].② There was no statistical difference in postoperative fever rates, urinary tract perforation rates [RR=1.73, 95%CI (0.43, 7.00), P=0.45; RR=1.02, 95%CI (0.11, 9.37), P=0.99], but the incidence of hematuria was higher [RR=1.99, 95%CI (1.09, 3.62), P=0.03], and the mean operative duration was longer [WMD=30.03 minutes, 95%CI (10.04, 50.02) minuntes, P=0.003].③ The mean hospitalization stay was delayed by an average of 3.73 days [WMD=3.73 days, 95%CI (3.02, 4.44) days, P<0.000 01]. ConclusionPCNL is better than URL in the stone clearance rate, while patients in the PCNL group have to stay in the hospital much longer, and should bear longer mean operative duration.