老年胆石症患者腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合35例分析

目的探讨腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合治疗老年胆总管结石可行性及安全性。方法选取2009年12月至2012年8月行腹腔镜、纤维胆道镜联合治疗胆囊结石、胆总管结石,一期胆总管缝合≥65岁老年病人35例。完全腹腔镜下胆囊切除,联合胆总管切开通过胆道镜置入取石网篮取石,术毕一期缝合胆总管。结果本组腹腔镜胆道镜联合行胆总管探查取石术成功率为100%,手术时间57~170 min,出血量10~100 ml,术后住院时间5~10 d,发生胆漏2例,再次手术1例。术后随访4月至2年,残余胆总管结石1例。结论在严格把握手术指征,认真评价术前影像学,术中熟练胆道镜操作,精准缝合的前提下,老年病人腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合治疗胆总管结石是安全可行的。     

腹腔镜联合胆道镜治疗胆总管结石107例

目的:探讨腹腔镜联合胆道镜在胆总管结石治疗中的临床价值和意义.方法:回顾分析我院2008-04/2011-03以腹腔镜联合胆道镜诊治的107例胆总管结石患者的临床资料,分析其胆总管探查取石的治疗过程,总结双镜联合的治疗意义.结果:本组中有102例双镜联合手术成功,5例中转开腹手术.手术时间:120-150min(平均140min).出血量:20-80mL(平均55mL).术后住院时间:7-15d(平均8.5d).放置腹腔引流管者83例,其中有16例仅术后第1天引流出少量淡黄色液体,3d后无液体引出,第4天拔管.其余术后第1天胆汁引流量约300mL,4d后基本无胆汁引出,第6天拔管.放置T管者于术后4wk拔管.本组全部患者均康复出院,随访3-6mo,无胆漏、结石残留及胆管狭窄等并发症发生.结论:腹腔镜联合胆道镜应用于胆总管探查是安全的,临床治疗效果良好,具有微创、并发症少等优点,值得临床推广.     

腹腔镜联合胆道镜经胆囊管治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床分析

目的探讨应用腹腔镜联合胆道镜经胆囊管行胆道探查治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床效果。方法对2014年1月-2015年12月陕西省核工业二一五医院收治的52例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者行腹腔镜联合胆道镜经胆囊管胆道探查取石术,观察其临床效果。结果 52例患者中40例顺利完成手术,手术成功率为76.92%。7例改为腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石、T管引流术,5例中转开腹行胆总管切开取石、T管引流术,中转开腹率9.62%。43例患者一次取石成功,占82.69%;剩余9例患者行二次取石,其中行经胆囊管胆道探查取石术者8例,行腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石术者1例。所有患者术后留置网膜孔引流管,术后3~10 d拔除,1例行腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石患者术后出现胆漏,经保守治疗后康复。无胆道出血、胆道感染等发生,平均住院时间(8.24±2.52)d,所有患者均得到随访1年,B超及磁共振胰胆管造影检查肝内外未见结石残留,肝功能胆红素指标正常。结论腹腔镜联合胆道镜经胆囊管进行胆道探查取石术具有创伤小、患者恢复快、并发症少、安全等优点,临床应用需严格掌握其适应证。     

腹腔镜胆囊切除术与小切口胆总管探查术的联合应用

目的探讨腹腔镜胆囊切除联合小切口胆总管探查治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管多发结石。方法本组23例胆囊结石合并胆总管多发结石,均来自2007年12月至2012年7月我院收治患者,采用腹腔镜下切除胆囊并解剖显露胆总管前壁,镜下确定腹壁切口位置,做3～5 cm切口入腹,经小切口切开胆总管,取石钳取石后根据情况用纤维胆道镜/硬性输尿管镜行胆道探查取石。结果本组无1例中转扩大切口手术,手术时间90～160 min,平均（120±10）min;住院时间10～20 d,平均13 d;21例拔除＂T＂管痊愈出院;2例术后＂T＂管造影B超检查右肝管残留结石,带管出院,术后6周经胆道镜取石痊愈;2例肺部感染,伤口均甲级愈合。结论该术式治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管多发结石创伤小,较单纯小切口安全,比全腹腔镜术式节省时间,取石彻底,适合基层医院。     

腹腔镜联合胆道镜治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石在基层医院的应用体会

目的总结腹腔镜联合胆道镜微创手术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石在基层医院的应用体会。方法分析2010年3月至2013年12月昆明医科大学第一附属医院46例腹腔镜联合胆道镜治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者的临床资料。结果 46例患者均成功在双镜联合下完成手术,治愈出院,无中转开腹病例,平均手术(100.0±20.2)min,平均住院(7.0±1.4)d,手术平均失血(77±21)ml。其中腹腔镜下留置T管引流41例,胆总管Ⅰ期缝合3例,经胆囊管插入胆道镜取石2例。术后均无残余结石、无胆漏等严重并发症发生。结论腹腔镜联合胆道镜治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石,具有微创、安全、恢复快、患者满意度高的优点,值得在基层医院推广应用,但须严格掌握适应证。     

腹腔镜联合内镜胆总管探查术

目的 探讨运用多种微创治疗手段,治疗经内镜取石失败的胆总管结石患者。方法 运用三窥联合的手术方式（术前内镜下经鼻胆管引流、腹腔镜胆总管探查术及术中胆道镜（对３９例胆总管结石患者进行微创治疗。结果 ３９例手术均获成功,无中转开腹,无残留结石及严重并发症。术后住院时间明显缩短,而手术时间与开腹手术相似。部分病例随边半以上未见远期并发症。结论 三镜联合行胆囊切除、胆总管探查术对于有较高内镜、腹腔镜技术水     

腹腔镜在胆道术后胆总管结石患者中的应用

目的 探讨腹腔镜治疗胆道术后胆总管结石的疗法及疗效。方法 回顾分析4年间37例胆道术后胆总管结石患者实施腹腔镜胆总管探查术的临床资料。结果 35例手术成功,2例中转开腹。30例借助内镜鼻胆管引流导管Ⅰ期缝合胆总管探查切口,7例胆总管内放置T型管引流。术后无胆漏及残石等并发症。手术时间(168±30.2)min,术后住院(11.5±1.3)d。结论腹腔镜手术治疗胆道术后胆总管结石安全、可行,但腹腔镜下分离粘连及解剖、缝合胆总管较困难。为减少并发症。应掌握中转开腹适应证。     

十二指肠镜、腹腔镜、胆道镜联合治疗胆结石(附20例报告)

目的 探讨十二指肠镜、腹腔镜、胆道镜联合治疗胆囊结石并胆总管结石的可行性与优越性.方法 选择20例胆囊结石并胆总管结石患者,先经十二指肠镜放置鼻胆管引流(ENBD)以便胆道减压,然后完成腹腔镜胆囊切除术,最后完成腹腔镜胆总管切开、胆道镜探查取石术,并一期缝合胆管.统计分析治疗结果,并发症和患者住院天数.结果 20例均痊愈,无并发症发生,住院时间缩短.结论 十二指肠镜、腹腔镜、胆道镜联合治疗胆囊结石并胆总管结石是一种创伤小、有效、安全且可靠的治疗模式.对掌握了腹腔镜下缝扎技术的普外科医师,可作为一种首选手术方法.     

急诊腹腔镜手术治疗胆总管结石合并轻、中度急性胆管炎的疗效

目的:探讨腹腔镜胆总管探查取石术(common bile duct exploration,CBDE)联合胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)治疗胆总管结石(common bile duct stones,C B D S)合并轻、中度急性胆管炎的安全性及有效性.方法:对2009-01/2012-12收治的37例胆囊结石伴CBDS合并轻、中度急性胆管炎患者行腹腔镜CBDE联合LC.除外有重度急性胆管炎、上腹部手术史、严重心肺及其他影响全麻或手术等疾病的患者.常规四孔法完成经胆总管切开的腹腔镜CBDE、T管引流及LC.根据术前MRCP了解结石大小、数量和位置,用推挤、冲吸及胆道镜等方法取石,病情不稳定者,不行术中胆道镜取石.所有患者均不行术中胆道造影.Winslow孔处常规放置腹腔引流管.有胆道残余结石者,术后8 wk行胆道镜取石.结果:37例胆囊结石伴CBDS合并轻、中度急性胆管炎患者,均顺利完成腹腔镜CBDE及LC.手术时间105.54 min±6.30 min;胆总管直径12.86 mm±0.58 mm;单发CBDS 14例(37.8%),多发CBDS 23例(62.2%);术后胆囊病理结果,急性胆囊炎9例(24.32%),慢性胆囊炎28例(75.68%);术后住院天数为11.27 d±0.82 d;总住院天数16.41 d±1.03 d.腹腔镜CBDE术后胆管炎症状及体征明显缓解,实验室检查结果改善.无中转开腹、术后腹腔出血、胆道损伤、手术死亡及伤口感染.术后胆漏4例,经保守治疗治愈.术后胆道残余结石4例,术后经T管窦道胆道镜取净结石.结论:对部分CBDS合并轻、中度急性胆管炎患者,腹腔镜CBDE及LC治疗是安全、有效及可行的.     

腹腔镜联合胆道镜胆总管探查一期缝合术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床效果分析

目的探讨腹腔镜联合胆道镜胆总管探查一期缝合术的安全性和有效性。方法回顾性分析2015年7月-2017年7月海南医学院第一附属医院肝胆胰外科收治的76例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者,分别行腹腔镜胆囊切除+胆道镜胆总管探查术+一期缝合(PDC组)(n=20)和腹腔镜胆囊切除+胆道镜胆总管探查术+T管引流(TTD组)(n=56),观察2组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、术后胃肠道功能恢复时间、腹腔引流管拔除时间、术后住院天数以及并发症(胆总管残余结石、胆瘘和胆道感染)发生率。术后随访2~12个月。计量资料2组间比较采用t检验,计数资料2组间比较采用χ~2检验。结果所有患者均成功实施腹腔镜手术,无1例中转开腹。PDC组和TTD组患者在手术时间[(106.2±15.8)min vs(147.5±23.2)min]、术后胃肠道功能恢复时间[(32.9±8.1)h vs(49.4±6.5)h]、腹腔引流管拔管时间[(3.5±1.3)d vs(5.7±2.6)d]、术后住院时间[(6.3±1.5)d vs(11.4±2.0)d]进行比较,差异均有统计学意义(t值分别为-2.87、-3.61、-2.64、-26.34,P值分别为0.036、0.021、0.034、<0.001)。2组患者术中出血、术后胆瘘、胆道残余结石和胆道感染方面差异均无统计学意义(P值均>0.05)。结论从有限病例进行初步研究发现,只要选择合适的病例,腹腔镜胆总管探查一期缝合术是安全有效的。     

Can common bile duct lithiasis be removed laparoscopically without external biliary drainage?

AIM OF THE STUDY: To evaluate the indications, feasibility and results of laparoscopic treatment of common bile duct stones without biliary drainage.PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1992 and 1999, laparoscopic procedures were performed in 70 consecutive patients, mean age 60 +/- 15 years (range: 18-82). Stone removal was attempted via the cystic duct (n=25) or choledocotomy (n=45). The emptiness of the common bile duct was checked by intraoperative cholangiography or endoscopy. After choledocotomy, closure was performed by interrupted or non-interrupted suture with slowly resorbable thread. Transcystic drainage was used whenever necessary.RESULTS: Nine conversions to laparotomy were necessary (12.8%). Among the 61 patients who had an exclusively laparoscopic procedure, 21 were treated via the transcystic route and 40 through choledocotomy. Biliary endoscopy was possible in only 10 of the 21 patients (47.6%) treated via the transcystic route and in all with choledocotomy. No biliary drainage was used in 16 of the 21 patients treated via the transcystic route and in 39 of the 40 treated through choledocotomy. The 30-day mortality was 1/61 (1.6%). Morbidity was 9.8% and 2 patients underwent a second laparoscopic procedure (one fistula on a choledocotomy suture, one hemoperitoneum of unknown origin). An endoscopic sphincterotomy for residual stone was necessary in 4 patients (4/61, 6.5%), 2 after choledocotomy for an unrecognized stone without biliary drainage.CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm the feasibility of laparoscopic treatment of common bile duct stones and suggest it can be performed without biliary drainage in most cases.     

Retained common bile duct stones after endoscopic sphincterotomy: temporary and longterm treatment with biliary stenting.

Basket extraction after endoscopic sphincterotomy failed to clear the bile ducts immediately in 85 (30%) of 283 consecutive patients with common bile duct stones. Temporary biliary drainage was established by the insertion of a single 7 Fr double pigtail stent before further planned endoscopic attempts at stone removal. In 84 patients (21 male: 63 female, mean age 77 years) this measure relieved biliary obstruction, mean serum bilirubin falling from 101 to 18 umol/l by the time of the second endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Six patients died from non-biliary causes with temporary stents in situ. Common bile duct stone extraction was achieved endoscopically in 50 of the remaining 79 patients after a mean of 4.3 months (range 1-12), 34 (68%) requiring only one further procedure. Three patients were referred for biliary surgery. Single stents were also effective for longterm biliary drainage in the remaining 26 elderly patients with unextractable stones. The main biliary complication of stenting was 13 episodes of cholangitis but all except one responded to medical treatment and early stent exchange. If common bile duct stones remain after endoscopic sphincterotomy, a single 7 Fr double pigtail stent is effective and safe for temporary biliary drainage before further endoscopic attempts at duct clearance and for longterm biliary drainage especially in the old and frail.     

Mirizzi综合征的微创外科治疗

目的 总结应用腹腔镜和内镜联合治疗Mirizzi综合征的初步经验，探讨微创外科对Mirizzi综合征的治疗效果。方法 对21例CsendesⅡ型，Ⅲ型Mirizzi综合征患者，采用内镜鼻胆管引流术（ENBD）配合实施腹腔镜胆囊切除，胆总管探查，胆囊胆管瘘I期缝合修补术（内衬ENBD导管）。结果 19例手术成功，2例中转开腹。术中结石清除率100％，无胆漏，胆道出血等术后并发症。手术时间平均93.6min，术后平均住院9．4d。术后随访18－41个月，未有结石复发。结论 应用腹腔镜和内镜手段，综合治疗Mirizzi综合征在技术上是切实可行的。但腹腔镜下缝合修复胆管壁缺损较困难，适宜在腹腔镜技术较成熟的单位开展。     

腹腔镜联合胆道镜再手术治疗肝内外胆管结石35例分析

目的探讨腹腔镜联合胆道镜再次手术治疗肝内外胆管结石的可行性以及安全性。方法以2008年1月至2012年5月35例接受腹腔镜胆道再次手术的肝内外胆管结石患者作为腹腔镜组,同期50例接受开腹手术的复发性肝内外胆管结石患者作为开腹手术组,采用t检验比较两组患者在术后早期下床活动、肠功能恢复以及住院时间等方面的差异,两组间切口感染率的比较采用χ2检验。结果 35例腹腔镜组病例中32例顺利完成腹腔镜手术,2例因黏连严重中转开腹手术,1例因出现皮下气肿中转开腹。腹腔镜组再次胆道手术平均手术时间148（105～200）min;围手术期均无出血、胆漏并发症。所有病例均行T管引流。术后腹腔引流管置管时间2～5 d,术后住院时间5～8 d。腹腔镜组均无切口感染发生。经统计学分析,在术后早期下床活动时间、肠功能恢复时间、术后住院时间以及切口感染率方面,腹腔镜组明显优于开腹手术组,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。腹腔镜组3例术后2个月因残留结石行纤维胆道镜经窦道取石术。术后随访6～24个月腹腔镜组所有病例未发现结石复发。结论腹腔镜胆道再次手术的创伤小、并发症少、术后恢复快,在掌握适应症的情况下选择适当病例用于治疗肝内外胆管结石是安全有效的。     

Outcome of gallbladder preservation in surgical management of primary bile duct stones

AIM: To evaluate the methods and outcome of gallbladder preservation in surgical treatment of primary bile duct stones. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with primary bile duct stones and intact gallbladders received stone extraction by two operative approaches, 23 done through the intrahepatic duct stump (RBD-IDS, the RBD-IDS group) after partial hepatectomy and 12 through the hepatic parenchyma by retrograde puncture (RBD-RP, the RBD-RP group). The gallbladders were preserved and the common bile duct (CBD) incisions were primarily closed. The patients were examined postoperatively by direct cholangiography and followed up by ultrasonography once every six months. RESULTS: In the RBD-IDS group, residual bile duct stones were found in three patients, which were cleared by a combination of fibrocholedochoscopic extraction and lithotripsy through the drainage tracts. The tubes were removed on postoperative day 22 (range: 16-42 days). In the RBD-RP group, one patient developed hemobilia and was cured by conservative therapy. The tubes were removed on postoperative day 8 (range: 7-11 days). Postoperative cholangiography showed that all the gallbladders were well opacified, contractile and smooth. During 54 (range: 6-120 months) months of follow-up, six patients had mildly thickened cholecystic walls without related symptoms and further changes, two underwent laparotomies because of adhesive intestinal obstruction and gastric cancer respectively, three died of cardiopulmonary diseases. No stones were found in all the preserved gallbladders. CONCLUSION: The intact gallbladders preserved after surgical extraction of primary bile duct stones will not develop gallstones. Retrograde biliary drainage is an optimal approach for gallbladder preservation.     

腹腔镜胆总管探查胆道一期缝合与T管引流疗效的比较

目的探讨与腹腔镜胆总管T管引流相比,腹腔镜胆总管一期缝合的优点,手术操作的技术关键,手术适应证以及并发症的预防。方法回顾对照分析2008年7月至2010年7月间行腹腔镜胆总管一期缝合的24例患者以及同期行腹腔镜T管引流的24例患者的临床病历资料,分为一期缝合组和T管引流组。结果一期缝合组与T管引流组的平均手术时间分别为（54.03±8.46）、（49.83±7.25）min,术中出血量分别为（15.13±4.26）、（16.23±5.25）ml,两组差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。而一期缝合组与T管引流组的首次肛门排气时间分别为（1.16±0.46）与（2.02±0.19）d、术后补液量分别为（8.05±2.73）与（11.56±4.72）L、术后住院时间分别为（7.73±1.76）与（13.85±4.09）d、住院费用分别为（11 393±283）与（15 836±296）元,带管时间分别为（6.45±2.15）与（73.68±9.15）d。一期缝合组的平均带管时间较T管引流组缩短（67.23±7）d。以上观察指标,两组差异有统计学意义（P〈0.01）。一期缝合组4例术后2～3 d发生胆汁漏,经保守治疗治愈,无严重并发症,全组患者均痊愈出院,随访1个月到2年,无结石复发和胆管狭窄等并发症。结论胆总管一期缝合有利于患者快速恢复;术中确保胆道无残余结石和胆总管下端通畅是开展胆总管一期缝合的前提条件;严格掌握手术适应证,注重操作技术要点是取得良好疗效的关键。     

Intraoperative removal of common bile duct stone through the intact papilla by flushing with saline solution combined with pharmacologic sphincter relaxation

In two patients with bile duct stones in the distal common bile duct the stones were successfully removed through the intact papilla without choledochotomy. In both patients, the stone was discovered on the intraoperative cholangiogram just after cholecystectomy. The stone was removed by intraoperative flushing with saline solution, combined with pharmacologic sphincter relaxation. This new technique employs glyceryl trinitrate and butylscopolamine bromide to relax the sphincter of Oddi, followed by intermittent flushing with saline solution to augment pressure in the the distal common bile duct. The saline flushing was initiated 3 min after the agents were administered. This technique is simple and less invasive than conventional methods of choledocholithotomy. We recommend this method as the first choice for the removal of common bile duct stones.     

经皮胆道造瘘碎石取石术治疗肝内胆管结石患者疗效分析

目的 探讨经皮胆道造瘘碎石取石术治疗肝内胆管结石患者的疗效,并对影响术后结石复发的因素进行分析。方法 2013年1月~2017年1月我院行经皮胆道造瘘取石治疗肝内胆管结石患者894例,在T管引流术后行经皮胆道造瘘碎石取石术治疗。术后行定期超声检查发现结石复发情况,应用Logistic回归分析影响患者术后结石复发的危险因素。结果 在894例患者中,结石完全取尽者844例（94.4%）;随访期间87例（9.7%）患者结石复发;单因素分析发现复发患者年龄≥60岁、胆结石最大直径≥1 cm、胆结石数目≥10个、存在胆管扩张、黄疸、胆汁细菌培养阳性和结石类型为胆色素结石或混合型结石比例显著高于未复发患者（均P<0.05）,进一步行多因素分析显示,年龄≥60岁、胆结石最大直径≥1 cm和胆结石数目≥10个为影响患者术后结石复发的独立危险因素。结论 经皮胆道造瘘碎石取石术治疗肝内胆管结石患者能取得良好的效果,取石安全有效,结石取尽率高。但对于年龄≥60岁、胆结石最大直径≥1 cm和胆结石数目≥10个有高危结石复发因素者,应密切随访,尽早发现,早期处理。     

Small sphincterotomy combined with endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation versus sphincterotomy

AIM： To compare small sphincterotomy combined with endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation （SES ＋ ELBD） and endoscopic sphincterotomy （EST） for large bile duct stones. METHODS： We compared prospectively SES ＋ ELBD （group A, n = 27） with conventional EST （group B, n = 28） for the treatment of large bile duct stones （≥ 15 mm）. When the stone could not be removed with a normal basket, mechanical lithotripsy was performed. We compared the rates of complete stone removal with one session and application of mechanical lithotripsy. RESULTS： No significant differences were observed in the mean largest stone size （A： 20.8 mm, B： 21.3 mm）, bile duct diameter （A： 21.4 turn, B： 20.5 ram）, number of stones （A： 2.2, B： 2.3）, or procedure time （A： 18 min, B： 19 rain） between the two groups. The rates of complete stone removal with one session was 85% in group A and 86% in group B （P = 0.473）. Mechanical lithotripsy was required for stone removal in nine of 27 patients （33%） in group A and nine of 28 patients （32%, P = 0.527） in group B.CONCLUSION： SES ＋ ELBD did not show significant benefits compared to conventional EST, especially for the removal of large （≥ 15 mm） bile duct stones.