老年人胆管结石内镜下括约肌切开预防并发症及疗效分析

目的分析内镜下括约肌切开术(EST)在老年人胆管结石治疗中的疗效及常见并发症的预防。方法选择2011年1月至2014年2月因胆管结石行EST治疗156例患者,通过内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)诊疗,了解及掌握其操作流程、治疗方法及并发症的预防。结果本组患者均ERCP插管成功,操作取石,术后常规留置鼻胆引流管。近期(3 d内)并发症23例(14.7%),其中注入性胰腺炎8例(5.1%),胆道感染2例(1.2%),术后出血1例(0.6%),淀粉酶升高8例(5.1%),上腹胀痛、呕吐4例(2.5%);远期(1~3个月)并发症18例(11.5%),其中周期胆道感染12例(7.6%),反复胰腺炎6例(3.8%)。术后1年随访36例患者(23.1%),其中18例(50.0%)再次出现胆管结石,考虑结石复发。结论老年人胆管结石行EST治疗优势,值得临床广泛推广。     

Retained and recurrent bile duct stones. Surgical or nonsurgical removal?

An experience with 69 patients who underwent 72 common bile duct reoperations for retained or recurrent choledocholithiasis is presented. The mean age of the patients was 57 years, and 35 patients had associated conditions. In this series six patients (8.3%) had minor complications and no patient developed major complications or died. Two (2.9%) patients developed recurrent choledocholithiasis. In recent years, nonoperative removal of retained stones through a T-tube by mechanical extraction or chemical dissolution, and removal of retained or recurrent stones by endoscopic sphincterotomy has gained widespread popularity. Retained or recurrent choledocholithiasis should be managed on an individual basis. Reoperation has a good success rate, low morbidity and mortality rates. It should be considered as the treatment of choice in low risk patients, in whom a retained stone cannot be mechanically extracted through a T-tube, and in patients with recurrent choledocholithiasis diagnosed after removal of the T-tube.     

腹腔镜胆总管探查治疗胆囊切除术后复发或残留胆总管结石的临床疗效

目的:探讨腹腔镜下胆总管探查(LCBDE)治疗胆囊切除术后复发或残留胆总管结石的临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析2012年4月—2015年6月52例行LCBDE治疗的胆囊切除术后复发或残留胆总管结石患者临床资料。结果:52例患者中成功完成LCBDE 48例(92.3%),其余4例均因腹腔粘连致密而中转开腹手术。48例患者术中放置T管15例,行胆总管一期缝合33例;手术时间(102.6±19.5)min,术中出血量(38.6±12.7)m L,术后住院时间(4.2±2.5)d;术后发生轻微胆汁漏2例,拔T管后胆汁性腹膜炎1例,均经保守治疗痊愈;术后胆总管残留结石1例,于术后6周经T管窦道胆道镜下网篮取石治愈。结论:LCBDE治疗胆囊切除术后复发或残留胆总管结石成功率高,且微创、恢复快,推荐临床应用。     

腔镜胆总管切开取石与内镜乳头括约肌切开取石术的远期疗效比较

目的 探讨腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术(laparoscopic common bile duct exploration,LCBDE)治疗胆总管结石的优越性.方法 回顾分析2001年6月至2006年6月间,在贵港市人民医院及广西壮族自治区人民医院微创中心行微创手术治疗的胆总管结石的临床资料.按手术方式不同分两组,即LCBDE组和EST(内镜乳头括约肌切开取石术,endoscopic sphincterotomy)组,比较两组的远期疗效.结果 该组225例,其中LCBDE 106例,EST 119例.术后随访1～6年,平均(3.2±0.8)年.LCBDE组结石复发率为3.77%(4/106),反流性胆管炎的发生率为2.83%(3/106),无乳头狭窄;EST组结石复发率为11.76%(14/119),乳头狭窄的发生率为7.56%(9/119),反流性胆管炎的发生率为12.61%(15/119).全组病例无胆管癌发生.术后结石复发率、乳头狭窄和反流性胆管炎的发生率在两组间的差别均有统计学意义.结论 在治疗胆总管结石方面,LCBDE的远期疗效优于EST.     

һ�����ŷ���Ƥ���ε������ڸ����⵨�ܽ�ʯ�����е�Ӧ�ã���35�����棩

??A one-stage percutaneous tract dilation technique in percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy (PTCS) for patients with bile duct stones: A report of 35 cases LOU Jian-ying, CHEN Wei, WANG Ji, et al. Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310009, China
Corresponding author: LIANG Ting-bo, E-mail: liangtingbo@zju.edu.cn
Abstract Objective To evaluate the safety, efficiency, indications and procedure of percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy (PTCS), using a one-stage percutaneous tract dilation technique, in patients with intrahepatic and/or common bile duct stones. Methods The medical records of 35 cases of intrahepatic and/or common bile duct stones treated by PTCS, using a one-stage tract dilation technique, from January, 2015 to April, 2017 in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine were studied retrospectively. All the patients were treated with lithotripsy and basket stone removal through PTCS using one-stage percutaneous tract dilation technique after percutaneous transhepatic cholangial drainage (PTCD). The perioperative morbitity, stone clearance rate, and stone recurrence rate were analyzed. Results The intrahepatic biliary duct and common bile duct were successfully accessed in all 35 cases using ultrasound-guided one-stage percutaneous tract dilation PTCS technique. The stones were completely removed (level A) in 65.7% (23/35) of the cases including 18 cases of intrahepatic stones and 5 cases of common bile duct stones. The stones were almost cleared (level B) in 22.9% (8/35) of intrahepatic stones cases. Stone clearance was achieved in 31 (88.6%) cases (level A and B). One case suffered PTCD site bleeding and one case had percutaneous transhepatic tract rupture during the secondary stone removal procedure. There were no other serious procedure-related complications such as life-threatened bleeding, bile leak and conversion to laparotomy. With follow-up of 1-28 months, 6 (26.1%) of 23 cases of level-A stones clearance had recurrent intrahepatic stones and cholangitis. Conclusion PTCS using one-stage dilation of the tract, is an effective, safe and alternative minimal invasive method forintrahepatic and/or common bile duct stones when surgery or peroral approach is not indicated.     

Management of common bile duct stones

Background: Common bile duct stones are still a frequent problem. Although new diagnostic and therapeutic techniques are continually being development, they remain poorly defined. Therefore, we decided to evaluate our standard method of diagnosing and treating common bile duct stones. The aim of the study was to determine the short- and long-term results of this method. Methods: Between 1985 and 1995, 552 consecutive patients (200 men and 352 women; median age, 69 years) underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) because of suspected common bile duct stones. If stones were detected, they were treated endoscopically, if possible. The results and complications of this policy were recorded. Patients were followed 1–13 years after undergoing ERC and endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES). Long-term results and complications during this period were also recorded. Results: ERC was attempted in 552 patients and succeeded in 510 patients (92%): ES was attempted in 315 patients and failed in five (98%). Duct clearance was done in 271 patients; in 26 of these patients, symptoms disappeared spontaneously. Ten patients underwent common bile duct exploration. Complications occurred in 46 patients (8.3%). Mortality was 0.4%, hemorrhage occurred in 3.6%, pancreatitis in 1.4%, sepsis and cholangitis also in 1.4%, and the lithotripter basket became impacted in four patients (0.8%), necessitating to common bile duct exploration. During follow-up, 45 patients (8%) returned, 35 with recurrent stones, five with cholangitis, two with stenosis of the papilla of Vater, and one with biliary pancreatitis. In 35 cases, complications were treated endoscopically, common bile duct exploration was performed in five cases, and symptoms disappeared spontaneously in five cases. Conclusions: ERC is a safe and reliable way of diagnosing common bile duct stones, and ES is a very efficient way of treating them. Morbidity and mortality are low, and the long-term results are very good.     

Endoscopic management of common bile duct stones leaving the gallbladder in situ. A cohort study with long-term follow-up

BACKGROUND: Obstructive jaundice caused by stones is a common disorder, mostly managed by endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by cholecystectomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether or not clearance of the common bile duct alone is sufficient as treatment for patients with choledocholithiasis. METHODS: A cohort with 447 patients with symptomatic cholecystocholedocholithiasis, undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) and if necessary sphincterotomy (ES). In 164 patients common bile duct stones were proven and treated endoscopically, without performing a subsequent cholecystectomy. All 164 patients were free of symptoms after the endoscopic intervention. This group of patients was compared with 78 patients who underwent cholecystectomy after endoscopic treatment of common bile duct stones. Patients were followed for 1-13 years after ERC and sphincterotomy results and complications were registered. RESULTS: The ages of the 164 patients in the in situ group were significantly higher than in the cholecystectomy group and the ASA classification (American Society of Anesthesiologists) was significantly higher in the in situ patients. Mean follow-up was 70.9 months. Of the in situ patients 27 (16%) returned with biliary symptoms; 12 with common bile duct stones, three with cholangitis, and one with stenosis of Vater's papilla. Eight patients returned with cholecystitis and 3 with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Thirteen patients underwent cholecystectomy and 11 were managed (also) endoscopically. Minor complications were 2 wound infections and 1 bleeding after cholecystectomy. Two patients (1%) died of abdominal sepsis due to cholecystitis. Of the patients who underwent cholecystectomy, 6 (7.6%) returned during follow-up. Three patients had common bile duct stones, 2 had cholangitis and 1 patient presented with papillostenosis. Three patients needed surgical common bile duct exploration and the other 3 were treated endoscopically. After reintervention, cardiopulmonary complications were observed in 1 patient. There was no related death. CONCLUSION: When common bile duct stones are treated successfully by endoscopic sphincterotomy and patients are free of symptoms, there is no need for routine prophylactic cholecystectomy.     

The possible role of sphincteroplasty and surgical sphincterotomy in the pathogenesis of recurrent common duct brown stones.

The hypothesis has been tested that postcholecystectomy common duct stones of the brown subtype are a consequence of three factors: bile infection, old age and previous sphincterotomy. It was found that: (i) 27 of 39 consecutive patients with recurrent common duct stones had brown stones. Nineteen of these 27 patients (70.3%) had previous sphincterotomy or sphincteroplasty: (ii) six of 15 patients with stone and bile analysis both at the time of cholecystectomy and at the second operation and who had sterile operative bile and non brown stones at the first operation, formed brown stones after T-tube drainage and after the onset of bile infection; (iii) patients with both intra and postoperative negative bile culture (n = 39 out of 137) had a lower mean age (50.5 years) and less frequently had a sphincterotomy than did individuals with a negative culture at operation, who subsequently had bile infection (n = 37; mean age 58.5 years; sphincterotomy in 88.8% of cases). In addition, in a follow up study of 105 patients with sphincterotomy and with sphincteroplasty (including ERCP or i.v. cholangiography in all cases), mean follow-up interval 6.1 years, 11.3% of patients had brown recurrent common duct stones. It is suggested that, since brown recurrent common duct stones are secondary to bile stasis and infection and the duodenum is going to be colonized by bacteria with increasing age, sphincterotomy (and subsequent stricture), facilitating bile contamination and bacterial overgrowth, could be one of the major determinants of brown recurrent common duct stones (RCS) formation. In particular, more than 11% of the patients with a sphincterotomy are going to form in the future RCS of the brown subtype.     

Complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

As laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become more widely practiced, the full spectrum of complications associated with this technique is being realized. We have performed 283 consecutive laparoscopic cholecystectomies with no deaths and a morbidity rate of 5.3% (15 of 283 patients; six major complications, nine minor complications). Major complications included one bile duct injury requiring laparotomy and t-tube insertion and two patients with retained stones. Symptomatic bile leakage occurred in three patients (1%). Two of these bile leaks were from accessory ducts entering the gallbladder bed; the third leak was secondary to a cystic duct leak. Eight patients (2.8%) required conversion to open cholecystectomy. Minor complications included three patients with subumbilical wound infections, two patients with urinary tract infections, one patient with costochondritis after operation, and three patients with prolonged hospital stays (more than 48 hrs) caused by ileus or fever. Several patients with life-threatening complications, including two patients who ultimately died, were transferred to our care from other centers. These included two patients with common duct injuries combined with duodenal perforations (one of whom died), one patient with a complete common duct transection, one patient with major common hepatic duct injury, and two patients with further instances of bile leakage. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be performed safely, and it can be associated with life-threatening complications. Prevention of complications is dependent on proper patient selection, meticulous technique, and an accepting attitude toward conversion to "open" cholecystectomy.     

自制腹腔镜胆道冲洗器在腹腔镜胆总管取石术中的应用：双中心经验总结

背景与目的 腹腔镜胆总管探查取石术（LCBDE）是治疗胆总管结石的主要治疗方式,但在LCBDE过程中,由于术中缺少窦道支撑,经典的胆道镜下网篮取石相对较为困难,对术者的操作技术要求高,反复的胆道镜取石也容易造成胆道镜损坏或胆管壁损伤。为了更好地提高取石效率,降低手术难度,笔者对胆道镜取石术进行改良,即LCBDE术中采用自制腹腔镜胆道冲洗器配合胆道镜取石。本研究总结两个中心应用该方法的临床效果。方法 回顾2017年1月—2021年1月福建省立医院和福建省浦城县医院收治的313例LCBDE术中应用自制腹腔镜胆道冲洗器治疗的胆总管结石患者的临床资料,分析患者围手术期情况及近期预后。结果 313例患者中,男132例,女181例;平均年龄（56.3±13.2）岁;173例患者为胆总管单发结石,140例患者为胆总管多发结石（结石最多者为10枚）;中位结石直径为0.5（0.2~3.1） cm,中位胆总管直径为1.2（0.6~3.3）cm。手术均顺利完成,无中转开腹。其中281例（89.8%）患者使用自制腹腔镜胆道冲洗器取净结石,32例（10.2%）患者术中联合网篮取石。307例（98.1%）患者一期取净结石,6例（1.9%）患者残留结石;157例（50.2%）术后一期缝合胆总管,156例（49.8%）术后留置T管引流。平均手术时间（109.3±29.4）min,平均术中出血量（42.5±8.4）mL,平均术后住院时间（7.6±3.2）d。术后12例出现胆汁漏,12例出现腹腔感染,9例出现肺部感染,7例出现切口感染,1例出现术后出血,均经保守治疗后痊愈。6例无法一期取净结石患者均于术后1.5个月行经T管窦道胆道镜取净结石。术后随访6~12个月,无胆管结石复发、胆道狭窄等其他并发症。结论 LCBDE术中应用自制腹腔镜胆道冲洗器安全可靠,取石效率高,故推荐使用。     

微创外科治疗胆总管结石的策略探讨

目的 探讨微创外科治疗胆总管结石(CBDS)的策略.方法 回顾性分析2001年6月至2007年1月304例CBDS患者的临床资料.按手术方式不同分三组:十二指肠镜下乳头气囊扩张术加LC组(EPBD组)、十二指肠镜下乳头括约肌切开取石术加LC组(EST组)、腹腔镜联合纤维胆道镜胆总管切开探查术加LC组(LCBDE组).结果 304例中EPBD组35例,EST组138例,LCBDE组131例.三组的手术成功率、近期并发症发生率、残石率比较,差异无统计学意义(x2值分别为1.93、0.038和0.427,P>0.05);手术时间比较差异有统计学意义(F=17.941,P=0.000),LCBDE组优于另两组(EPBD-EST:P=0.122,EST-LCBDE:P=0.000,EPBD-LCBDE:P=0.020);住院时间相比差异有统计学意义(F=24.016,P=0.000),其中EPBD组最短(EPBD-EST:P=0.000,EST-LCBDE:P=0.198,EPBD-LCBDE:P=0.000).远期并发症:EPBD组结石复发2例(6.7%),胆管炎1例(3.3%),无乳头狭窄;LCBDE组结石复发7例(6.0%),胆管炎3例(2.6%),无乳头狭窄;EST组结石复发18例(15.8%)、乳头狭窄9例(7.9%)、胆管炎14例(12.3%);比较三组结石复发、胆管炎、乳头狭窄的发生率,差异有统计学意义(x2值分别为6.482、9.160和12.02,P<0.05),EST组高于EPBD组和LCBDE组.结论 有适应证的胆总管结石可首选EPBD治疗,失败或无适应证者则选择LCBDE,EST仅适用于有严格适应证者.     

Primary common duct stones.

Thirty patients were identified as having primary common duct stones. Criteria for diagnosis included at least a two year symptom free interval following cholecystectomy; soft, light brown stones or sludge present in the common duct; and the absence of a long cystic duct remnant or a biliary stricture from the previous surgery. The average age of the 30 patients was 66 years. The interval between cholecystectomy and the diagnosis of primary common duct stones averaged 12 years. Acute cholangitis was a frequent mode of presentation. At the time of surgery the bile duct was often dilated out of proportion to the serum bilirubin. In only one of the 30 patients was ampullary stenosis present. Twenty-six of the 30 patients had only stone extraction and insertion of a T tube for treatment of their primary common duct stones. Twenty-two of the 26 were followed for an average of four years and nine months with no evidence of recurrent stones in 82% (18/22). Four developed recurrent primary common duct stones one, five, five, and 7 years later. It is concluded that most patients with primary common duct stones do well after stone extraction alone.     

胆管内乳头状黏液性肿瘤21例临床分析

目的 探讨胆管内乳头状黏液性肿瘤（intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm of the bile tract， IPMN-B）的临床特点及诊治方法。方法 回顾性分析郴州市第一人民医院2012年1月至2019年6月收治 的21例IPMN-B患者临床资料。结果 21例患者中男4例，女17例，平均年龄（63.0±7.5）岁。临床表现： 腹痛19例，黄疸10例，畏寒发热7例；既往有胆道手术史13例；合并胆管结石14例。患者CA19-9阳性率 38.1%（8/21）， CEA阳性率28.6%（6/21）；术前诊断率33.3%（7/21）。肿瘤位置：位于左肝19例，右肝及胆 总管各1例。手术方式：肝部分切除+胆道探查术18例，肿瘤活检+胆道探查术2例，胰十二指肠切除术1例。 术后病理诊断：腺癌11例，腺瘤10例。本组死亡4例，其中1例因术后1个月并发肝功能衰竭死亡； 2例术 后病情进展，分别于术后8个月及10个月死亡； 1例术后2年复发并发消化道出血死亡。术后复发3例，其 中1例再次手术，2例保守治疗，其余患者顺利康复。结论 IPMN-B患者以老年女性为主，多数合并有胆 道手术史、胆管结石，好发于左肝，术前诊断率低，手术切除是主要治疗手段，预后较好。     

腹腔镜胆囊切除术后再疼痛的原因分析及预防

目的探讨腹腔镜胆囊切除术（laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC）后再疼痛的原因及其预防措施。方法回顾性分析2000年1月～2006年1月168例LC术后再疼痛患者的临床资料（非切口创伤引起;LC术后并发症引起;LC术后1年内又出现类似术前症状;LC术前症状符合胆囊炎并胆囊结石症状,而未能进一步完善诊断,术后又出现LC术前相同症状及新发症状,考虑为其他病因引起的LC术前疼痛症状）。并对其术后再疼痛的原因及处理进行总结。结果颈肩痛24例;戳口痛5例;持续性腹腔内疼痛71例,其中28例胆漏,23例继发胆总管结石,6例术后急性胰腺炎,残株胆囊炎和（或）胆囊管残余结石8例,肝下间隙积液感染5例,十二指肠球部溃疡1例;阵发性腹部疼痛32例,其中9例为肠蠕动亢进,23例胆道运动障碍;黄疸并疼痛31例,其中右肝管狭窄肝内胆管局灶性扩张7例,胆管炎10例,肝外胆管残余结石11例,壶腹癌2例,胆总管下端癌1例;胆道蛔虫症2例;腹胀诱发疼痛2例;剧烈恶心、呕吐诱发疼痛1例。168例均症状缓解,其中再手术、ERCP＋EST治疗86例,非手术治疗82例。168例随访1～36个月,无其他并发症发生。结论LC术后疼痛的原因涉及到围手术期的每个环节;完善LC术前检查,重视术中术后的每个环节是减少LC术后疼痛的关键。     

腹腔镜联合十二指肠镜一期治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石

目的探讨腹腔镜联合十二指肠镜一期治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的可行性及优点。方法 2009年6月～2011年6月,采用腹腔镜联合十二指肠镜一期治疗90例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石。胆总管单发或多发结石,结石直径≤20 mm。第1例先行十二指肠镜手术,以后89例先行腹腔镜胆囊切除术（laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC）,LC术后变换体位为俯卧或侧俯卧位行十二指肠镜手术。术后常规放置鼻胆管引流。结果手术均获成功,90例均取尽结石,无并发症发生。住院5～9 d,平均7 d。随访1～23个月,其中54例〉12个月。无结石复发和胆道狭窄、胰腺炎、逆行胆道感染等并发症。结论在已开展腹腔镜和十二指肠镜手术,同时手术室具备胆道造影条件的单位,开展腹腔镜联合十二指肠镜一期治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石,是一种较好的选择。     

同期两镜或同期三镜治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石2410例

目的探讨同期两镜(腹腔镜＋胆管镜)或同期三镜(腹腔镜＋胆管镜＋十二指肠镜)下一期缝合术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床应用体会。 方法回顾性分析1992年6月至2018年6月期间,符合入选标准的2 410例患者的临床资料。 结果一期缝合的2 410例患者中有2 226例(92.4%)腹腔镜手术获成功,中转开腹一期缝合术获成功16例(0.7%);术后胆汁漏101例(4.2%),术后残石26例(1.1%),术后有其他并发症41例(1.7%),总并发症发生率为7.0%(169/2 410)。 结论从本医院有限病例进行初步研究发现,只要选择合适的病例,同期两镜或同期三镜下一期缝合术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石是可行、有效和安全的。     

Follow-up of 161 unselected consecutive patients treated laparoscopically for common bile duct stones

Background: Aim was to study the incidence of recurrent ductal stones and of biliary strictures at follow-up after laparoscopic treatment of gallstones and common bile duct stones and to update the short-term results. Methods: Ductal stones were proven in 161 patients of 1,975 (8.1%) undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic transcystic CBD exploration was the method of choice. If this was unsuccessful, laparoscopic choledochotomy was performed. After treatment, all patients were enrolled in a continued, ongoing follow-up study. Results: Laparoscopic CBD exploration was completed in 157 cases (transcystic 107, choledochotomy 50). Retained stones occurred in eight patients (5%) and major complications (cystic duct leakage, hemoperitoneum) in six (3.8%); mortality occurred in one high-risk patient (0.6%). Follow-up available in 154 patients (two unrelated deaths) for a period of up to 62 months showed the occurrence of recurrent ductal stones in five cases (3.2%) and no signs of bile stasis, suggestive of ductal stricture, on the basis of clinical and laboratory findings. Conclusions: This prospective, ongoing follow-up study demonstrates that laparoscopic treatment of gallstones and common bile duct stones in unselected patients is feasible and safe. Received: 21 May 1996/Accepted: 10 March 1997     

Long-term prognosis after treatment of patients with choledocholithiasis

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to examine the long-term prognosis of after treatment of patients with choledocholithiasis, including the recurrence of lithiasis, and to thereby determine the best treatment modality for choledocholithiasis based on its pathological entity. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Choledocholithiasis can be caused by either primary bile duct stones that originate in the bile duct or by secondary bile duct stones that have fallen out of the gallbladder. The recurrence rates vary depending on the type of choledocholithiasis. METHODS: Two-hundred thirteen outpatients who were treated for choledocholithiasis from 1982 to 1996 were selected as subjects and monitored for a period ranging from 5 to 19 years (mean, 9.6 years). The 213 patients were divided into 3 groups: 87 patients who had undergone choledocholithotomy and T-tube drainage (including the use of the laparoscopic method), 44 patients who had undergone choledochoduodenostomy, and 82 patients whose stones were removed by endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST). Recurrence of lithiasis was examined for each type of treatment modality. RESULTS: Choledochoduodenostomy was performed in 44 cases for the purpose of preventing any recurrence. The recurrent rate was analyzed in 169 cases. Choledocholithiasis recurred in 17 of the 169 cases (10.1%). The remaining 152 patients that showed no recurrence of lithiasis were examined and compared. The diameter of the common bile duct measured during the initial treatment was more dilated in patients with recurrent lithiasis (16.6 +/- 5.9 mm) than in patients without any recurrence (9.8 +/- 4.9 mm; P < 0.05). Peripapillary diverticula were observed in 10 of the 17 patients with recurrent lithiasis (58.8%), and in 34 of the 152 nonrecurrent patients (22.3%), showing that diverticula were more common in recurrent cases (P < 0.05). Furthermore, while primary bile duct stones were found in 11 of the 17 cases with recurrent lithiasis (64.7%), primary stones were found in only 37 of the 152 nonrecurrent patients (24.3%), showing primary bile duct stones were also more common in recurrent patients (P < 0.05). The recurrent patients were examined by surgical procedure. Nine patients with choledocholithotomy and T-tube drainage had a recurrence (10.3%), and 8 patients in the EST group had a recurrence (9.8%). The recurrence rates for these procedures were higher than for cases with choledochoduodenostomy (recurrence rate: 0%, P < 0.05). In particular, lithiasis recurred in 5 of the 12 patients with T-tube drainage for primary bile duct stones (41.7%). CONCLUSION: Although choledocholithotomy and T-tube drainage, including open and laparoscopic surgery, is presently a common procedure for choledocholithiasis, this procedure will not necessarily prevent a recurrence of the disease. For older patients with primary bile duct stones, choledochoduodenostomy or EST is recommended.     

Evaluation of the results of external choledochoduodenostomy for retained, recurrent, or primary common duct stones.

Twenty-five patients were treated for retained, recurrent, or primary common duct stones by permanent drainage of the biliary tract with external choledochoduodenostomy. Twenty-one patients had common duct stones which became evident two to fifty years after the initial biliary tract procedure and which may represent stones formed in the common duct. Three recent patients had a clinical history of primary common duct stones, had stones which were soluble in chloroform-methanol solution, and had hepatic bile which was lithogenic as determined by evaluating the molar percentage of cholesterol, phospholipid, and bile salt in bile samples obtained at the time of choledochoduodenostomy. These data suggest that further stone formation is possible and that permanent bypass of the sphincter of Oddi is indicated to prevent recurrent bile duct obstruction. Long-term evaluation of the results of external choledochoduodenostomy indicates that the procedure is safe and effective in the prevention of recurrent biliary tract calculi.     

经皮经肝穿刺同期胆道镜取石治疗复发性肝胆管结石

目的总结应用经皮经肝穿刺同期胆道镜治疗复发性肝胆管结石的治疗经验。方法回顾性分析我院2014年10月~2016年6月22例复发性肝胆管结石患者,在同一次麻醉下,B超引导下经皮经肝胆道穿刺成功后,同期行胆道镜碎石取石的手术疗效。结果 21例患者穿刺后。取石成功,仅1例穿刺失败后中转开腹;1次取尽结石成功17例(81.0%),2次取尽结石者3例,3次取尽结石者1例,无严重并发症及死亡。随访至今无发现结石复发。结论对于复发性肝胆管结石患者,严格把握适应证,经皮经肝穿刺胆道镜同期治疗是可行、有效和安全的。