ObjectiveTo investigate clinical efficacy and advantages and disadvantages of primary closure with two endoscopes (1aparoscope+choledochoscope) or three endoscopes (laparoscope+choledochoscope+duodenoscope) through the cystic duct for treatment of gallbladder stone with secondary common bile duct (CBD) stones.MethodsThe clinical data of 83 patients with gallbladder stones with secondary CBD stones treated by two or three endoscopes combined with CBD exploration and lithotomy and primary closure through cystic duct from January 2017 to December 2018 in the Chengdu Second People’s Hospital were collected retrospectively. Among them, 41 patients were treated by two endoscopes mode (two endoscopes group), 42 cases were treated by three endoscopes mode (three endoscopes group).ResultsThere were no significant differences in the general conditions such as the gender, age, preoperative diameter of CBD, chronic diseases, etc. between the two and three endoscopes group (P>0.05). All 83 cases underwent the operations successfully and recovered well. The success rate of operation, stone clearance rate, drainage volume of abdominal drainage tube on day 1 after the operation, time of abdominal drainage tube removal after the operation, and hospitalization time had no significant differences between these two groups (P>0.05). The time of operation, intraoperative bleeding volume, and the postoperative pancreatitis rate in the three endoscopes group were significantly more (or higher) than those in the two endoscopes group (P<0.05), but the condition of liver function recovered after the operation was better than that in the two endoscopes group (P<0.05).ConclusionsWith the strict control of the operation indications, it is safe and feasible to use two or three endoscopes through the cystic duct pathway and primary closure of CBD for treatment of gallbladder stone with secondary CBD stones. However, the choice of operative methods of two or three endoscopes should be based on the general situation of the patients before and during the operation.
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 effect of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration via choledochotomy and T tube drainage. Metheods Laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct with choledochoscopy via choledochotomy was performed in 105 patients, T tube was placed in all patients with laparoscopic suturing technique.Results Except negative exploration in 2 cases, duct clearance was achieved in 99 per cent (102/103) of patients. Conclusion Laparoscopic exploratoin of common bile duct via choledochotomy and T tube drainage is one of the safe and effective management options for common bile duct calculi.
ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) plus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) with LC plus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for patients with concomitant cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis by using meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane Library、EMBASE, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chinese Science and Technology Academic Journal, Chinese Journal Full-text Database and Wanfang database to identify relevant articles from their inception to 31 October 2018. A meta-analysis was carried out using the RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 13 RCTs were included in this meta-analysis, 747 cases received LC+LCBDE and 761 cases underwent LC+ERCP. The meta-analysis results showed that no significant difference between the LC+LCBDE group and the LC+ERCP group in terms of common bile duct (CBD) stone clearance rate [RR=0.99, 95%CI (0.95, 1.02), P=0.87] and overall complications [RR=0.94, 95%CI (0.72, 1.22), P=0.64]. The LC+LCBDE group had higher rate of postoperative bile leakage rate [RR=3.87, 95%CI (2.01, 7.42), P<0.000 1] than that LC+ERCP group. However, the LC+LCBDE group had lower rate of postoperative pancreatitis [RR=0.28, 95%CI (0.14, 0.55), P=0.002] than that LC+ERCP group.ConclusionsBoth LC+LCBDE and LC+ERCP are equivalent in CBD stone clearance rate and overall complications, LC+LCBDE is associated with a higher postoperative bile leakage rate and lower rate of postoperative pancreatitis, appropriate treatment should be selected according to the individual patient’s condition.
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.
Objective To investigate therapeutic effect of endoscopic sphincterotomy with small incision (SES) combined with endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) in treatment of larger common bile duct stones. Methods The clinical data of 80 patients with common bile duct stones treated in our hospital from February 2014 to October 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. These patients were divided into endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) group (n = 40) and SES+EPBD group (n = 40) according to the therapeutic methods. The diameter of common bile duct stone was 10–20 mm. The operation status, recurrence rate and residual rate of common bile duct stone, and complications rate within 3 months after operation were compared between these two groups. Results The age and gender had no significant differences between these two groups (P>0.05). The operation time was shorter (P<0.05) and the intraoperative bleeding was less (P<0.05) in the SES+EPBD group as compared with the EST group. There were no significant differences in the hospital stay and recovery time of gastrointestinal function between these two groups (P>0.05). The levels of ALT, AST, DBIL, and TBIL in these two groups before treatment had no significant differences (P>0.05); after treatment, the above indicators of liver function in the SES+EPBD group were significantly lower than those in the EST group (P<0.05), and which were significantly decreased more in the same group (P<0.05). The residual stone, stone recurrence, and complications such as acute pancreatitis, acute cholangitis, bile leakage and postoperative hemorrhage were not found in the SES+EPBD group, the rates of these indicators in the SES+EPBD group were significantly lower than those in the EST group (P<0.05). Conclusion SES combined with EPBD has a good therapeutic effect on larger common bile duct stones (diameter of common bile duct stone is 10–20 mm) and recurrence rate is low.
Objective To explore the clinical therapeutic value of pancreatoduodenectomy in patients with carcinoma of ampulla of Vater (AVC). Methods The clinical data of 195 patients with AVC between March 1995 and March 2009 in this hospital were analyzed retrospectively. All the patients were divided into non-surgery group (n＝51), palliative surgery group (n＝96), and resection group (n＝48) according to the treatment methods. Results The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates in the resection group were higher than those in the non-surgery group and the palliative surgery group (Plt;0.01). However, the incidence of complications in the resection group was higher than that in the nonsurgery group or the palliative surgery group (Plt;0.05). The radical resection rates, 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates of carcinomas of head of pancreas were significantly lower than those of carcinomas of the terminal of common bile duct or carcinomas of duodenal papilla (Plt;0.05, Plt;0.01). There was no significant difference of the perioperative mortality, complications rate, 1-year, 3-year, or 5-year survival rate between preoperative drainage jaundice group and preoperative nondrainage jaundice group (Pgt;0.05). The perioperative mortality in the resection group above the age of 70 years old was higher than that of less than or equal to 70 years old （Plt;0.05）. Compared with the non-surgery group or palliative surgery group, there were significant increasement of the incidence of serious or deadly perioperative complications in the resection group (Plt;0.05). Conclusions Surgical resection remains one of the most important measures of the treatment of AVC, in particular, the radical pancreatoduodenectomy is the only effect way for AVC, thus significantly prolonging the patient’s postoperative survivals and significantly improving the qualities of life.
ObjectiveTo compare difference of therapeutic effects between endoscopic frequency-doubled double pulse neodymium yttrium aluminium garnet (FREDDY) laser and endoscopic traditional mechanical lithotripsy in treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDs).MethodsThe clinical data of 207 patients with CBDs treated with ERCP and lithotripsy in the Ninth People’s Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine from March 2009 to March 2019 were analyzed retrospectively, of which 71 cases treated by FREDDY (FREDDY group) and 136 cases treated by mechanical lithotripsy (mechanical group). The success rate of stone removal, operation time, postoperative hospitalization time, hospitalization cost, consumables cost, and complications were compared between the two groups.ResultsThere were no significant differences in the general condition and the preoperative clinical data between the two groups (P>0.05). There was no perioperative death in the two groups. There were no significant differences in terms of the postoperative routine laboratory biochemical indexes, consumables cost, hospitalization cost, and rates of the bleeding, postoperative pancreatitis, perforation and biliary tract infection between the two groups (P>0.05). Although the operation time of the FREDDY group was significantly longer than that of the mechanical group (P<0.05), the success rate of stone removal was significantly higher, the postoperative hospitalization time was shorter, the total complications rate and stone residual rate were significantly lower in the FREDDY group as compared with the mechanical group (P<0.05).ConclusionEndoscopic FREDDY laser lithotripsy has a better curative effect and less complications in treatment of large CBDs than mechanical lithotripsy, but operation time needs further to be improved.
Objective To evaluate the use of fast track surgery （FTS） in the treatment for cholecystolithiasis combined with calculus of common bile duct （CBD） by combination of laparoscope and duodenoscope. Methods One hundred and twenty patients with cholecystolithiasis combined with calculus of CBD underwent laparoscopic cholecyst-ectomy （LC） and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography （ERCP） were divided into FTS group （n=55） and conventional group （n=65），which were accepted the perioperative therapy of FTS or conventional therapy，respectively. After operation，the incision pain，nausea and vomiting，infusion time，loss of body weight，out-of-bed time，dieting time，postoperative hospitalization，hospital costs，and complications were compared in two groups. Results Compared with the conventional group，the postoperative infusion time，dieting time，out-of-bed time，and postoperative hospitali-zation were shorter，the incidence rates of pulmonary infection，and urinary systems infection，pancreatitis，nausea and vomiting， and incision pain were lower，the loss of body weight was lower in the FTS group （P＜0.05），but the differences of WBC and serum amylase at 24 h after operation were not significant between the FTS group and conventional group（P＞0.05）. Conclusion The FTS is safe，economic，and effective in the treatment for cholecystolithiasis combined with calculus of CBD by combination of laparoscope and duodenoscope.
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.