经内镜逆行胰胆管造影术治疗老年胆总管结石的临床疗效

目的探讨经内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)治疗老年胆总管结石的临床疗效及术后并发症的影响因素。方法回顾性分析136例行ERCP治疗的老年胆总管结石患者的临床资料,分析其临床疗效及术后并发症发生的影响因素。结果 136例老年胆总管结石患者经ERCP治疗后,取石成功率和取净率均为100%,住院时间、疼痛缓解时间和抗感染治疗时间方面均较显著。经单因素、多因素Logistic回归分析,括约肌功能障碍(SOD)病史(OR=1.318,95%CI=1.114~4.926)、胰管显影(OR=1.101,95%CI=1.022~2.731)和插管时间>60 min(OR=1.026,95%CI=1.016~3.769)为影响ERCP治疗老年胆总管结石术后并发胰腺炎的主要危险因素;胆道结石病史(OR=1.249,95%CI=1.105~3.621)、胆道中高位梗阻(OR=1.412,95%CI=1.263~4.788)和胆管治疗史(OR=1.281,95%CI=1.051~2.871)为影响ERCP治疗老年胆总管结石术后并发胆道感染的主要危险因素。结论 ERCP治疗老年胆总管结石疗效显著,术后并发症影响因素主要为SOD病史、胰管显影、插管时间、胆道中高位梗阻、胆道结石病史和胆管治疗史。     

胆总管结石经内镜逆行胰胆管造影术后结石残留的危险因素分析

目的 探讨胆总管结石经ERCP术后结石残留的危险因素。方法 回顾性分析2021年2月至2022年11月在江苏省中医院消化内镜中心行ERCP治疗的胆总管结石患者资料,收集可能与ERCP术后结石残留有关的危险因素进行单因素和多因素分析,寻找ERCP术后结石残留的独立危险因素。结果 符合入组标准者331例,男177例、女154例,年龄最小19岁,最大95岁,中位年龄65岁。患者均痊愈出院,其中ERCP术后结石残留39例,结石残留患者比例为11.8%。单因素分析发现入院时患胆管炎、入院基线白细胞计数、中性粒细胞绝对值、碱性磷酸酶、直接胆红素、总胆红素水平、泥沙结石、结石数量≥3枚、结石最大径≥1.0 cm、术中行EST为ERCP术后结石残留的危险因素(P<0.05)。多因素分析显示结石数量≥3枚(OR=2.959,95%CI:1.277～6.855,P<0.05)、结石最大径≥1.0 cm (OR=3.627,95%CI:1.577～8.341,P<0.05)为ERCP术后结石残留的独立危险因素。结论 当胆总管结石数量≥3枚或结石最大径≥1.0 cm时,ERCP术后更易出现结...     

结石成分与ERCP胆总管取石联合胆囊切除术后胆总管结石复发相关性研究

[目的]探讨结石成分对经内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)胆总管结石取石术联合胆囊切除术后胆总管结石复发的影响。[方法]收集行ERCP胆总管结石取石联合胆囊切除术患者176例,观察胆总管结石成分对术后胆总管结石复发影响情况,采用非条件二元Logistic回归分析评价多个危险因素与术后结石复发的关系。[结果]164例(93.2%)患者获得随访,随访12~36个月,期间共有28例胆总管结石复发,总复发率15.2%,其中胆色素组、胆固醇组、混合结石组复发率分别为13.0%、44.4%、14.8%,胆固醇组复发率最高且与其他2组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05);危险因素分析:胆道感染(OR=3.267,95%CI:1.07~8.46,P=0.032)、胆总管扩张(OR=3.751,95%CI:2.2~9.87,P=0.035)、结石成分(OR=15.239,95%CI:3.65~34.8,P0.001)是ERCP胆总管取石联合胆囊切除术后胆总管结石复发的独立危险因素,其中结石成分危险性最高。[结论]胆道感染、胆总管扩张及结石成分是ERCP胆总管取石联合胆囊切除术后胆总管结石复发的独立的预测因素,胆固醇组复发率高,应加强预防性治疗。     

经内镜逆行性胰胆管造影术取石后胆道结石复发的危险因素的Meta分析

[目的]采用Meta分析的方法系统评价经内镜逆行性胰胆管造影术(ERCP)取石后结石复发的相关危险因素。[方法]以ERCP、bile duct stone recurrence、risk factor等为检索词,检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、中国期刊全文等数据库。应用Revman5.3软件进行Meta分析。[结果]合并十二指肠乳头旁憩室较无合并十二指肠乳头旁憩室患者(OR=1.60,95%CI:1.19~2.14,P0.05)、胆总管扩张增粗较无胆总管扩张增粗患者(OR=3.76,95%CI:2.04~6.94,P0.05)ERCP取石后胆总管结石复发率显著增加,差异均有统计学意义;合并多发结石患者较无合并多发结石患者ERCP取石后胆总管结石复发差异无统计学意义(OR=0.87,95%CI:0.42~1.80,P0.05)。[结论]合并十二指肠乳头旁憩室、胆总管扩张增粗为ERCP取石后结石复发的危险因素。     

胆总管结石患者并发化脓性胆管炎的预警因素分析

目的探讨胆管结石并发化脓性胆管炎的早期危险因素。方法收集2013年1月-2015年6月就诊于青海省人民医院的胆总管结石患者入院3 d内的临床资料,包括性别、年龄、CRP、ALP、GGT、DBil、胆总管直径、结石直径、氧分压、尿胆原。将研究对象分为单纯胆管结石组和胆管结石并发化脓性胆管炎组;2组间计量资料比较采用独立样本t检验,计数资料比较采用χ2检验,危险因素筛选采用二元logistic回归分析。结果单纯胆管结石组和胆管结石并发化脓性胆管炎组比较,性别、CRP、ALP、GGT、DBil、胆总管直径、氧分压、尿胆原等差异均有统计学意义(P值均0.05);进一步二元logistic回归分析显示性别[比值比(OR)=4.24,P0.001]、CRP≥3 mg/dl(OR=2.39,P=0.030)、GGT≥224 U/L(OR=4.33,P0.001)、ALP≥198 U/L(OR=2.76,P=0.010)、DBil73μmol/L(OR=2.57,P=0.020)、胆总管直径≥13 mm(OR=8.21,P0.001)、氧分压80 mm Hg(OR=31.23,P0.001)、尿胆原≥2+(OR=2.28,P0.001)是胆管结石并发化脓性胆管炎的危险预警因素。结论胆总管结石并发化脓性胆管炎可早期发现危险因素,以便更好的选择手术时机和方式。     

输尿管结石钬激光碎石术后结石残留的危险因素分析

目的 探讨输尿管结石钬激光碎石术后结石残留的危险因素.方法 回顾性总结吉林大学第一医院2006年1月至2009年7月因输尿管结石行输尿管镜钬激光碎石术患者的临床资料及随访资料,随访4~6 w,共265例.单个变量与结石残留的关系采用单向方差分析,多个变量与结石残留的关系采用logistic多变量回归分析.结果 265例接受输尿管镜钬激光碎石术的患者,结石残留率44.9%.单向方差分析显示:患侧肾功能(P＝0.003),ESWL史(P＝0.008),手术时间(P＝0.035),结石最大径(P＝0.008),结石位置(P＝0.001),结石击碎后最大径(P＝0.045),术后几日下地活动(P＝0.008),术后应用解痉利尿药物(P＝0.001)分别与结石残留有显著相关性.性别,体重指数,总肾功能,患侧肾积水程度,多发输尿管结石,双侧输尿管结石,合并上尿路感染,输尿管狭窄,黏膜包裹结石,术后第一日补液量,术后第一日尿量,术者经验与结石残留无显著相关性(P＞0.05).多变量回归分析显示:患侧肾功能(OR=4.477,95%CI:1.312～5.278),结石位置(OR=3.582,95%CI:2.008～6.389),术后应用解痉利尿药物(OR=1.944,95%CI:1.140～3.315)与输尿管结石钬激光碎石术后结石残留有显著相关性.结论 患侧肾功能,结石位置,术后应用解痉利尿药物是输尿管结石钬激光碎石术后结石残留的危险因素,术前充分评估患者的病情,术后相应治疗将降低结石残留的风险.     

内镜逆行胰胆管造影治疗取石困难胆总管结石64例

目的:探讨内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography,ERCP)在取石困难胆总管结石中的应用价值.方法:连续收集64例取石困难胆总管结石患者,分析在ERCP术中操作的难点,巨大结石采用机械碎石、激光碎石、体外震波碎石法;胆总管畸形采用变换体位、反复吸引、网篮体外塑形法;胆管过度扩张或狭窄采用吸引或柱状气囊扩张法;结石坚硬采用反复缓慢加压碎石法再进行胆管取石.结果:64例取石困难者,经ERCP取石成功53例,总体取石成功率为82.81%.其中巨大结石者18例,取石成功15例,成功率83.33%;胆总管畸形者18例,取石成功14例,成功率77.78%;胆总管过度扩张或狭窄者19例,取石成功16例,成功率84.21%;结石坚硬者9例,取石成功8例,成功率88.89%.结论:ERCP术可以有效地治疗取石困难胆总管结石.     

经内镜逆行胰胆管造影术后胆总管结石复发的危险因素分析

目的探讨经内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)取石后复发患者的临床特点及危险因素。方法回顾性分析2013年1月-2015年6月就诊于青海省人民医院并行ERCP取石治疗的胆总管结石患者的临床资料。共入组292例,根据有无胆总管结石复发分为复发组31例和未复发组261例,比较2组患者的年龄、性别、BMI、胆道情况和胆石情况等临床资料。计数资料组间比较采用χ~2检验,筛选出的因素进行二元logistic回归分析。结果复发组和未复发组在结石数量≥2个和胆管直径≥14 mm两个方面差异均有统计学意义(χ~2值分别为4.80、5.61,P值均0.05),而既往有胆囊切除史是胆总管结石复发的独立危险因素(比值比=20.10,95%可信区间:4.11~98.25,P0.05)。结论既往有胆囊切除史是导致ERCP取石后胆总管结石复发的重要危险因素。     

胆总管结石十二指肠镜治疗后复发因素研究

目的 探讨胆总管结石经ERCP治疗后复发的相关因素.方法 选择资料完整经ERCP治疗的胆总管结石患者,共802例,其中297例伴胆囊结石,222例胆囊已切除,283例胆囊无结石,统计复发频度并对复发因素进行单变量和多变量logistic回归分析.结果 802例患者平均随访84.8个月,92例（11.5%）结石复发.胆囊结石,胆总管直径≥1.5 cm,机械碎石及胆管角度≤120°在单因素及多因素分析中均显示为复发因素;胆固醇结石,乳头狭窄或Oddi括约肌功能障碍在多因素分析中为复发因素;胆囊切除,毕Ⅱ式胃大部切除,结石≥1.5 cm及多发结石在单因素分析中为复发因素.结论 ERCP治疗胆总管结石的病例中胆囊结石,胆总管直径≥1.5 cm,机械碎石及胆管角度≤120°可能为主要的复发因素;胆囊切除,毕Ⅱ式胃大部切除,乳头狭窄或Oddi括约肌功能障碍,结石≥1.5 cm,胆固醇结石及多发结石也是复发相关因素.     

治疗性内镜下逆行胰胆管造影技术治疗胆总管结石216例临床分析

随着内镜下逆行胰胆管造影（ERCP）技术的不断提高,治疗性ERCP技术,如内镜下乳头切开术、针状电刀乳头预切开术、内镜下十二指肠鼻胆管引流术（ENBD）、内镜下乳头括约肌气囊扩张术（EPBD）和机械碎石术（ML）等在胆总管结石患者的治疗中得到广泛应用。我们对我院运用ERCP技术治疗的216例胆总管结石患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析。     

内镜下逆行胰胆管造影术治疗老年胆总管巨大结石40例

目的探讨内镜下逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)治疗老年胆总管巨大结石的可行性及安全性。方法 40例老年胆总管巨大结石患者完善术前准备,密切监护下经十二指肠镜先行ERCP,发现胆总管结石后行内镜下十二指肠乳头括约肌切开(EST)和机械碎石(EML)取石,视具体情况留置鼻胆管引流及支架置入引流。结果 40例患者37例取石获得成功,成功率92.5%;其中10例经过二次取石。所有患者腹痛症状明显改善,皮肤巩膜黄染迅速消褪,发热患者48 h内体温趋于正常。术后并发轻型胰腺炎4例,乳头肌切口创面轻度渗血2例,均经内科保守治疗痊愈,未发生肠穿孔、胆道撕脱等严重并发症和死亡。结论 ERCP治疗老年胆总管巨大结石是一种安全、有效的治疗方法,应考虑作为治疗的首选方案。     

Imaging of the common bile duct in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Options for managing the common bile duct during laparoscopic cholecystectomy include routine peroperative cholangiography and selected preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The use of these methods was reviewed in 350 patients with symptomatic gall stones referred for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Unit A (n = 114) performed routine cystic duct cholangiography but undertook preoperative ERCP in patients at very high risk of duct stones only; unit B (n = 236) performed selected preoperative ERCP on the basis of known risk factors for duct stones. The detection rate for common bile duct stones was similar for units A and B (16% v 20%). In unit A, five of seven patients who had preoperative ERCP had duct stones. Operative cholangiography was technically successful in 90% of patients and duct stones were confidently identified in 13, one of whom went on to immediate open duct exploration. Postoperative ERCP identified duct stones in only four patients, indicating spontaneous passage in eight. In unit B, preoperative ERCP was undertaken in 76 of 236 (32%) patients and duct stones were identified in 47 (20%). Duct clearance was successful in 42 (18%) but failed in five (2%), necessitating elective open duct exploration. Both protocols for imaging the common bile duct worked well and yielded satisfactory short term results.     

Endoscopy for bile duct stones

In the era of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and advanced non-invasive imaging studies, pre-operative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for bile duct stones should be reserved for selected patients. ERCP remains the therapy of choice for removal of bile duct stones in the post-cholecystectomy patient and in patients with intact gallbladders. Bile duct stones can be cleared in nearly all patients using endoscopic techniques of sphincterotomy and mechanical lithotripsy. Difficult or complex bile duct stones can be endoscopically removed in the majority of patients with additional techniques such as extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, intraductal lithotripsy and/or stent placement. In non-operative patients in whom stone clearance cannot be achieved, long-term stent placement is a potential option in patients who are not candidates for further therapy. Endoscopic therapy may be effective in selected patients with intrahepatic biliary stones.     

Predictors of unsuccessful mechanical lithotripsy and endoscopic clearance of large bile duct stones

BACKGROUND: Mechanical lithotripsy is used to break large bile duct stones. This study investigated the predictors of unsuccessful mechanical lithotripsy. METHODS: Consecutive patients with bile duct stones underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiography, sphincterotomy, and basket removal of stones. Mechanical lithotripsy was performed for stones of large size (>15 mm diameter) that precluded extraction intact. Success was defined as complete clearance of the duct. Various predictive factors, including size and number of stones, stone impaction, serum bilirubin, presence of cholangitis, and bile duct diameter were analyzed in relation to the success or failure of lithotripsy. RESULTS: A total of 669 patients underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for suspected choledocholithiasis, which was found in 401 patients. Of the latter patients, 87 had large stones that required mechanical lithotripsy. Lithotripsy was successful in 69 (79%) patients. Impaction of the stone(s) in the bile duct was the only significant factor that predicted failure of lithotripsy and consequent failure of bile duct clearance. Other factors, including stone size, were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical lithotripsy is successful in about 79% of patients with large bile duct stones. The only significant factor that predicts failure of mechanical lithotripsy is stone impaction in the bile duct.     

Extracorporeal lithotripsy of bile duct stones using ultrasonography for stone localization

In 19 patients, extraction of bile duct stones through the papilla using a Dormia basket or a mechanical lithotripter was not possible following endoscopic sphincterotomy. After the insertion of a nasobiliary drain, extracorporeal lithotripsy was performed with intravenous sedation using an ultrasonographic stone localization system. The number and location of stones were first determined by retrograde cholangiography. At the time of lithotripsy, saline was injected in the bile ducts to modify the acoustic impedance of tissues surrounding the stones, and subsequent ultrasonography was effective in localizing all stones present in 4 of 5 (80%) patients with intrahepatic stones, and 13 of 14 (93%) with common bile duct stones. In 10 patients (53%), fragmentation was satisfactory and the bile ducts were cleared completely. The mean single stone diameter was significantly smaller in successful cases of fragmentation compared with failures (22.8 +/- 6.6 mm vs. 40 +/- 10 mm). The results in patients with multiple stones were significantly worse than those in patients with single stones of similar size (25% vs. 100% successful fragmentation). Reasons for this difference in results included the small size of the focal area and the reduced ability of ultrasonography (1) to adequately visualize multiple calculi individually and (2) to assess the degree of stone destruction. Care was taken to first await the resolution of infection or the correction of coagulation abnormalities when present; no morbidity following extracorporeal lithotripsy was observed. Despite its 3-step approach (endoscopic sphincterotomy, lithotripsy, and endoscopic extraction), the need for only intravenous sedation and the absence of patient immersion in water render this technique attractive for elderly and frail patients.     

Clinical utility of intraductal US to decrease early recurrence rate of common bile duct stones after endoscopic papillotomy

Background and Aim: The aim of the present study was to determine whether additional intraductal ultrasound (IDUS) to confirm complete stone clearance decreases the recurrence rate of common bile duct stones for a 3‐year period after endoscopic papillotomy (EPT). Methods: IDUS was carried out with a thin‐caliber ultrasonic probe (diameter 2.0 mm, frequency 20 MHz) via transpapillary route after stone extraction. If IDUS showed evidence of residual stones and/or sludge, endoscopic management was performed until IDUS examination was negative. A prospective study was conducted on 59 consecutive patients undergoing additional IDUS after stone extraction between January 1996 and May 2003 (IDUS group). The recurrence rate of common bile duct stones was compared with a historical control group (August 1988 to December 1995) consisting of cases that did not undergo IDUS (non‐IDUS group). Potential risk factors for recurrence of common bile duct stones were assessed by univariate and multivariate analysis on logistic regression. Results: In 14 of 59 patients (23.7%), IDUS detected small residual stones not seen on cholangiography. The recurrence rate was 13.2% (17 of 129 patients) in the non‐IDUS group and 3.4% (two of 59 patients) in the IDUS group (P < 0.05). Multivariate analysis subsequently identified non‐IDUS status as an independent risk factor for recurrence (odds ratio 5.12, 95% CI 1.11–23.52, P = 0.036). Conclusions: Additional IDUS to confirm complete stone clearance after EPT decreases the early recurrence rate of common bile duct stones.     

经内镜鼻胆管引流术在腹腔镜胆管探查中的作用

目的：应用经内镜鼻胆管引流术(ENBD)作为腹腔镜胆管探查术(LCBDE)胆管引流方式，探讨其应用价值。方法：对拟行腹腔镜下胆管探查的患者术前进行ENBD，后经胆总管探查切口应用液电碎石、胆道镜取石，将肝内外胆管结石取净，保留鼻胆管于胆管内，将胆总管探查切口一期缝合，常规放置腹腔引流管。术后经鼻胆管造影，肝内外胆管无残余结石，无胆漏，择期拔除腹腔引流管及鼻胆管。结果：共43例患者术前行ENBD，平均6．1d后行LCBDE。36例(83.7％)患者成功进行LCBDE，胆管探查切口一期缝合。术后经鼻胆管造影，发现1例(2．6％)术中胆道镜漏诊--小结石，经内镜取石后痊愈；无胆管狭窄及胆漏等并发症发生。另有7例患者(18．6％)中转开腹手术，其中2例保留鼻胆管，胆管切口行一期缝合，术后顺利拔除鼻胆管。38例患者(88．4％)均成功应用：ENBD进行胆管引流，平均3．2d拔除腹腔引流管，6.7d拔除鼻胆管，无相关并发症发生。结论：ENBD作为LCBDE胆管引流，是安全有效的方式，且术后引流时间短，并发症少，可充分发挥出腹腔镜治疗胆管结石微创的优势。     

Gallstone disease: Symptoms, diagnosis and endoscopic management of common bile duct stones

Bile duct stones (BDS) are often suspected on history and clinical examination alone but symptoms may be variable ranging from asymptomatic to complications such as biliary colic, pancreatitis, jaundice or cholangitis. The majority of BDS can be diagnosed by transabdominal ultrasound, computed tomography, endoscopic ultrasound or magnetic resonance cholangiography prior to endoscopic or laparoscopic removal. Approximately 90% of BDS can be removed following endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC)+sphincterotomy. Most of the remaining stones can be removed using mechanical lithotripsy. Patients with uncorrected coagulopathies may be treated with ERC+pneumatic dilatation of the sphincter of Oddi. Shockwave lithotripsy (intraductal and extracorporeal) and laser lithotripsy have also been used to fragment large bile duct stones prior to endoscopic removal. The role of medical therapy in treatment of BDS is currently uncertain. This review focuses on the clinical presentation, investigation and current management of BDS.     

Poorly expandable common bile duct with stones on endoscopic retrograde cholangiography

AIM: To describe characteristics of a poorly expandable (PE) common bile duct (CBD) with stones on endoscopic retrograde cholangiography.METHODS: A PE bile duct was characterized by a rigid and relatively narrowed distal CBD with retrograde dilatation of the non-PE segment. Between 2003 and 2006, endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) images and chart reviews of 1213 patients with newly diagnosed CBD stones were obtained from the computer database of Therapeutic Endoscopic Center in Chang Gung Memorial Hospital. Patients with characteristic PE bile duct on ERC were identified from the database. Data of the patients as well as the safety and technical success of therapeutic ERC were collected and analyzed retrospectively.RESULTS: A total of 30 patients with CBD stones and characteristic PE segments were enrolled in this study. The median patient age was 45 years (range, 20 to 92 years); 66.7% of the patients were men. The diameters of the widest non-PE CBD segment, the PE segment, and the largest stone were 14.3 ± 4.9 mm, 5.8 ± 1.6 mm, and 11.2 ± 4.7 mm, respectively. The length of the PE segment was 39.7 ± 15.4 mm (range, 12.3 mm to 70.9 mm). To remove the CBD stone(s) completely, mechanical lithotripsy was required in 25 (83.3%) patients even though the stone size was not as large as were the difficult stones that have been described in the literature. The stone size and stone/PE segment diameter ratio were associated with the need for lithotripsy. Post-ERC complications occurred in 4 cases: pancreatitis in 1, cholangitis in 2, and an impacted Dormia basket with cholangitis in 1. Two (6.7%) of the 28 patients developed recurrent CBD stones at follow-up (50 ± 14 mo) and were successfully managed with therapeutic ERC.CONCLUSION: Patients with a PE duct frequently require mechanical lithotripsy for stones extraction. To retrieve stones successfully and avoid complications, these patients should be identified during ERC.