双镜联合胆总管探查取石术后胆总管一期缝合与T管引流疗效对比

目的探讨腹腔镜联合胆道镜下胆总管探查取石术后胆总管一期缝合与T管引流的疗效和安全性比较。方法回顾总结常州市武进人民医院2014年6月至2016年12月100例成功实施双镜联合胆总管探查取石术患者的临床资料,其中胆总管一期缝合组30例,T管引流组70例,比较两组手术时间、术中出血量、腹腔引流时间、术后住院时间和并发症发生率等指标。结果两组患者手术顺利,无中转开腹,无手术死亡病例。一期缝合组术后发生胆漏1例,T管引流组术后胆漏2例(χ~2=0.016,P=0.898),两组手术时间[(135.7±42.2)min vs(148.6±50.1)min,P=0.225]和术中出血量[(47.0±57.6)mL vs(56.6±49.1)mL,P=0.408]差异无统计学意义;但一期缝合组腹腔引流时间及术后住院时间明显少于T管引流组,差异有统计学意义(P0.01)。结论掌握手术适应证前提下,双镜联合胆总管探查取石胆总管一期缝合方法安全可行,体现了微创的理念,值得临床推广应用。     

腹腔镜联合胆道镜胆总管探查术的单中心回顾性对照研究

目的:探讨腹腔镜联合胆道镜胆总管探查一期缝合与T管引流两种手术方式的特点,评估其可行性与安全性。方法:回顾分析2010年2月至2014年10月203例行腹腔镜胆囊切除、胆总管探查术患者的临床资料,其中88例(43.3%)患者术中放置T管引流(T管组),115例(56.7%)患者采用一期缝合(缝合组)。结果:两组患者一般情况差异无统计学意义,缝合组手术时间、术中出血量、胃肠功能恢复时间、术后住院时间、残留结石率小于T管组(P0.05),术后胆漏发生率高于T管组(P=0.035),术后出血、感染、复发率两组相比差异无统计学意义。两组均无胆管狭窄发生。结论:腹腔镜胆总管探查一期缝合术的手术效果及术后恢复情况优于T管引流,但其胆漏率高于T管引流。     

腹腔镜下胆总管探查一期缝合术治疗胆总管结石的临床疗效

目的探讨腹腔镜下胆总管探查T管引流术与腹腔镜下胆总管探查一期缝合术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石(CBDS)的临床疗效。方法回顾性收集2012年7月~2017年6月我院收治的156例胆囊结石合并CBDS患者临床资料,根据采取手术方式不同,分为一期缝合组(n=82)和T管引流组(n=74);比较两组术中情况、术后恢复情况、术后并发症发生情况及手术前后肝功能指标变化。结果两组均成功手术,无中转开腹。一期缝合组与T管引流组手术时间、术中出血量比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05);一期缝合组术后胃肠功能恢复时间、胆道引流管拔除时间及住院时间均明显短于T管引流组(P0.05);两组早期滑脱、引流失败、急性胰腺炎等发生率比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05);但一期缝合组较T管引流组胆漏、电解质紊乱致厌食恶心及总并发症发生率均明显降低(P0.05);术后5 d,两组碱性磷酸酶、γ-谷氨酰转肽酶、直接胆红素水平较术前均明显降低(P0.05),组间比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。术后随访9~12个月,两组均无结石复发、胆管切口狭窄、死亡发生,所有患者肝功能均恢复正常。结论在适用范围内采用腹腔镜下胆总管探查一期缝合术治疗胆囊结石合并CBDS是安全可行的,具有并发症少、术后恢复快等优势。     

腹腔镜胆总管一期缝合术与T管引流术治疗肝外胆管结石的疗效比较

目的:探讨腹腔镜胆总管一期缝合术与T管引流术治疗肝外胆管结石的临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析2012年9月至2015年9月138例腹腔镜胆总管探查术的临床资料,对比52例腹腔镜胆总管一期缝合术(缝合组,n=52)与86例腹腔镜胆总管探查+T管引流术(T管组,n=86)的临床疗效。结果:两组患者均顺利完成腹腔镜手术,两组手术时间、术中出血量、拔管时间及术后胆道并发症发生率差异均无统计学意义(P0.05);缝合组术后住院时间、肠道功能恢复时间及胆汁引流时间均低于T管组,两组差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。两组患者术后并发症均为胆漏,其中缝合组发生2例(3.8%),T管组4例(4.7%),经5~6 d充分引流后自行消失,均未发生腹腔感染、胆汁性腹膜炎等严重并发症。结论:在严格掌握手术适应证的前提下,腹腔镜胆总管一期缝合术是治疗肝外胆管结石的理想微创术式之一,值得临床推广。     

腹腔镜胆总管探查一期缝合与置T管引流的对比研究

目的比较腹腔镜下胆总管探查术后一期缝合与T管引流的效果,探讨胆总管探查术后一期缝合的临床价值。方法2003年1月-2006年5月对75例腹腔镜下胆总管探查术胆总管切开取石后胆总管分别一期缝合（n=41）或T管引流（n=34）。结果一期缝合组术后胆漏1例;T管引流组术后胆漏2例,2组术后胆漏发生率无统计学差异（x^2=0．027,P=0．868）。一期缝合组随访41例,随访0．5～2年,平均0．7年,术后1年内B超、CT检查均未发现胆漏、胆管狭窄及结石复发。T管引流组随访33例,随访0．5—2．1年,平均0．8年,术后1年内B超、CT检查均未发现胆漏、胆管狭窄及结石复发。结论腹腔镜胆总管探查术后一期缝合避免置T管引起的一系列弊端,安全可行。     

胆总管一期缝合治疗胆总管结石疗效及术后胆漏危险因素分析

目的比较胆总管结石患者行胆总管一期缝合及T管引流术的疗效,并探讨胆总管一期缝合术后胆漏的危险因素。方法回顾性分析2010年1月至2016年8月安徽省阜南县人民医院收治并完成胆总管探查术的183例患者临床资料,其中胆总管一期缝合(观察组)82例,T管引流(对照组)101例,分析比较两组的治疗效果,并对胆总管一期缝合术后胆漏发生的相关因素进行单因素分析和Logistic回归多因素分析。结果两组均顺利完成手术,围手术期无死亡病例。两组手术时间、术中出血量、腹腔引流管留置时间比较,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05);而在术后肛门首次排气时间、术后住院时间上,两组差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。实施胆总管一期缝合术的82例患者中,8例发生术后胆漏(9.76%),单因素分析结果显示:胆道手术史、术前血白蛋白水平、术前总胆红素与一期缝合术后胆漏有关(P0.05);多因素分析结果表明:术前胆红素水平以及术前血清白蛋白水平是影响胆总管一期吻合术后胆漏的独立危险因素(P0.05)。结论胆总管一期缝合术的临床疗效优于T管引流术;胆总管一期缝合术后胆漏受多种因素影响。为减少术后胆漏的发生,术者需具备熟练的手术缝合技术(包括腔镜缝合技术)。需开展大样本、多中心的前瞻性随机对照研究来进一步明确胆总管切开后一期吻合和T管留置的手术适应证。     

腹腔镜胆总管探查一期缝合胆道内支架管的应用经验

目的总结腹腔镜胆总管探查一期缝合胆道内支架管应用治疗胆总管结石的经验。方法回顾性分析我院自2016年1月至2018年1月期间96例胆总管结石病例,其中腹腔镜胆总管探查一期缝合组(一期组)47例,腹腔镜胆总管探查一期缝合胆道内支架置入组(支架组)49例,比较两种术式的手术相关情况(手术时间和术中出血量)、术后恢复情况(首次进食时间、腹腔引流时间及术后住院天数)、术后并发症(胆漏、腹腔出血、结石残留)。结果两组病例均治愈出院,无手术死亡,术后无结石残留。在首次进食时间、腹腔引流时间及术后住院天数,支架组优于一期组(P0.05);在手术时间、术中出血量、术后并发症(出血、胆漏)发生率,两组病例之间的差异无统计学意义(P0.05),4例胆漏病人(一期组3例,支架组1例)经短期引流后治愈,2例出血病人(一期组1例,支架组1例)经输血等保守治疗后治愈。支架组术后2～3周行胃镜检查拔除胆道内支架管,其中有部分病例胆道内支架管已自行排出。术后随访1～6月,无胆道结石复发、胆道狭窄。结论腹腔镜胆总管探查一期缝合胆道内支架管应用具有创伤少、恢复快、住院时间短、护理简单,不增加胆道并发症的发生率,是治疗胆总管结石的一种有效、可行方法。     

腹腔镜胆总管探查经腹鼻胆管引流的临床应用

目的探讨腹腔镜下胆总管探查取石术后经腹留置鼻胆管引流的手术方法及临床应用价值。方法回顾性分析遵义医学院附属成都市第二人民医院2013年5月至2015年4月期间289例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者接受手术治疗的临床资料,先实施腹腔镜下胆囊切除、胆总管探查取石,再根据术中情况行经腹置鼻胆管引流(鼻胆管引流组)、一期缝合术或T管引流(T管引流组)。结果 289例中,腹腔镜下胆囊切除、胆总管探查取石后239例经腹留置鼻胆管引流、一期缝合获得成功,15例留置T管引流,其他35例腹腔镜手术失败中转开腹。两组术前一般情况比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05);手术时间、术中出血量、术后胆汁引流量比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05);术后胆汁引流失败、胆道引流管早期滑脱、胆道出血、胰腺炎发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05);而术后胆漏、电解质紊乱致厌食恶心发生率、住院时间、胃肠功能恢复时间、胆道引流管留置时间比较,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);鼻胆管引流组比T管引流组的胆漏、电解质紊乱发生率低,住院时间短,胃肠功能恢复快,留置鼻胆管时间短。结论腹腔镜胆总管探查取石术后经腹留置鼻胆管引流、一期缝合术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石具有创伤小、并发症少,康复快、疗效确切、住院时间短等优点,值得临床推广。     

腹腔镜胆总管探查术后一期缝合与置T管引流的比较

传统的胆总管探查术(common bile duct exploration,CBDE)强调放置T管引流,防止术后出现胆漏及胆总管狭窄,已成为胆道外科治疗常规之一.但腹腔镜胆总管探查术后放置胆管引流管增加了住院时间和拔除T管后并发症的发生率,并且增加了患者长期带T管的痛苦,严重影响了生活质量.而胆管一期缝合却因术后胆漏等原因未能得到推广.胆管一期缝合术后引起胆漏的常见原因有:粗针大线缝合,在针眼处渗漏胆汁;胆管内结石未取干净,引起胆管梗阻,胆道内压力升高,缝合口处渗漏胆汁;胆道探查和取石的过程中造成医源性胆管内壁损伤,术后胆管黏膜水肿,胆道内压力升高而出现胆漏.     

急性胆管炎腹腔镜胆总管探查后一期缝合与T管引流的临床研究

目的 探讨急性胆管炎腹腔镜胆总管探查后一期缝合与T管引流两种手术方式的特点,评估其可行性与安全性.方法 回顾性分析首都医科大学宣武医院普外科2012年1月-2014年12月100例急性胆管炎患者行腹腔镜胆囊切除+胆总管探查术患者的临床资料,其中54例(54％)患者行一期缝合,46例(46％)患者行T管引流.结果 100例患者均成功行手术治疗,手术时间缝合组显著短于T管组(96.72 minvs123.00 min,P=0.001),术中出血量缝合组与T管组相比显著减少(27.13 mlvs38.48 ml,P=0.009).缝合组术后胃肠功能恢复时间(1.57 dvs2.33 d,P=0.003)与术后住院时间(6.19 dvs9.20d,P=0.000)均显著短于T管组.两组术后腹腔总引流量(309.22mlvs212.46ml,P=0.070),引流时间(3.96 dvs4.02 d,P=0.875),术后胆漏发病率(9.3％ vs0,P=0.060),出血率(5.1％vs2.2％,P=0.622)差异均无统计学意义.结论 急性胆管炎腹腔镜胆总管探查后一期缝合严格掌握适应证后,与T管引流相比,同样安全有效.     

二孔法腹腔镜胆总管切开探查治疗胆总管结石

目的探讨二孔法腹腔镜胆总管切开探查治疗胆总管结石的效果。方法对25例胆囊炎症状轻、胆总管周围无粘连显露佳的胆总管结石患者行二孔法腹腔镜胆总管切开探查治疗,并予一期缝合,观察患者的手术和随访情况。结果 2例患者术后出现胆漏,分别经腹腔引流3 d和4 d治愈。21例患者获得随访,术后1年内均无结石复发,无胆管狭窄及胆管炎发作。结论在合理掌握适应证的情况下,二孔法腹腔镜胆总管切开探查、胆总管一期缝合治疗胆总管结石可取得较好的疗效。     

腹腔镜胆总管切开取石治疗胆总管结石的疗效观察

目前腹腔镜胆囊切除术（laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC）已经成为治疗胆囊炎、胆囊结石的金标准。胆总管结石在我国的发病率较高，占全国胆结石患者的5％～29％，平均18％。我院在成熟开展LC的基础上于2005年9月开展腹腔镜胆总管切开探查取石术（laparoscopic video choledochoibersc opichepatocholangiolitbotomy T—tubedrainage，LCHTD），就其手术经验及疗效分析报道如下。     

腹腔镜下胆总管切开探查在胆管结石中的应用

目的 :总结腹腔镜下胆总管切开探查取石术的临床应用经验 ,探讨其手术方法 ,术中注意事项及临床应用的优缺点。方法 :腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石 ,T管引流或一期缝合。结果 :2 3例胆总管结石手术2 1例成功 ,2例中转开腹。结论 :腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石术应掌握适应证 ,才能使创伤减小 ,康复快且安全。     

腹腔镜下经胆囊管胆总管探查术与胆总管探查并一期缝合术治疗胆总管结石的对比研究

目的:比较腹腔镜下经胆囊管胆总管探查术(LTCBDE)与经胆总管探查(LCBDE)+胆道一期缝合术治疗胆总管结石的效果。方法:回顾性分析2013年1月—2015年12月期间应用微创手术治疗的104例胆总管结石的患者临床资料,其中50例行LTCBDE(LTCBDE组)与54例行LCBDE+胆道一期缝合术(LCBDE+一期缝合组),比较两组的相关临床指标。结果:与LCBDE+一期缝合组比较,LTCBDE组手术时间(91.7 min vs.110.9 min)、术中出血量(15.5 mL vs.17.4 mL)、术后引流量(28.4 mL vs.44.6 mL)、带管时间(7.8 d vs.9.7 d)、住院时间(8.8d vs.10.6d)均明显减少(均P0.05);LTCBDE组术后胆汁漏的发生率明显低于LCBDE+一期缝合组(2.0%vs.13.0%,P=0.036),其他并发症的发生率两组无统计学差异(均P0.05)。结论:LTCBDE治疗胆总管结石安全可靠的,且较LCBDE+胆道一期缝合术更符合微创的目的,在两种术式的适应证均满足的情况下,可优先考虑。     

Laparoscopic transcystic duct common bile duct exploration

The modern era of common bile duct (CBD) surgery started with Mirizzi, who introduced intraoperative cholangiography in 1932. Intraoperative choledoscopy had been developed as an adjunctive to intraoperative cholangiography, which helped to detect CBD stones in an additional 10% to 15% of instances that otherwise would have been missed. Findings have shown choledochoscopy to be an important technique for efficient and effective management of CBD stones. Efforts to treat patients with common duct stones in one session and to avoid the potential complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy resulted in several laparoscopic transcystic CBD (LTCBDE) techniques. The techniques of transcystic stone extraction include lavage, trolling with wire baskets or biliary balloon catheters, cystic duct dilation, biliary endoscopy, and stone retrieval with wire baskets under direct vision and antegrade sphincterotomy, lithotripsy, and catheter techniques. The indications for LTCBDE are filling or equivocal defects at cholangiography, stones smaller than 10 mm, fewer than 9 stones, and possible tumor. The contraindications are stones larger than 1 cm, stones proximal to the cystic duct entrance into the CBD, small friable cystic duct, and 10 or more stones. Experience with LTCBDE shows that the approach is applicable in more than 85% of cases, with a success rate of 85% to 95%. It also is shown to be more cost effective than postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Recent developments in LTCBDE have focused mainly on implementation of robotically assisted surgery and new imaging methods such as magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with three-dimensional virtual cholangioscopy and three-dimensional ultrasound. Further technological advances will facilitate the application of laparoscopic approaches to the common duct, which should become the primary strategy for the great majority of patients.     

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

Background: Herein I describe my >12-year experience with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Methods: From 21 September 1989 through 31 December 2001, 3,580 patients presented with symptomatic biliary tract disease. Laparoscopic cholecystecomy (LC) was attempted in 3,544 of them (99.1%) and completed in 3,527 (99.5%). Laparoscopic cholangiograms (IOC) were performed in 3,417 patients (96.4%); in 344 cases (9.7%), the IOC was abnormal. Forty-nine patients (1.4%) underwent preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and 33 patients (0.9%) underwent postoperative ERCP. LCBDE was attempted in 326 cases and completed in 321 (98.5%). It was successful in clearing the duct in 317 of the 344 patients with abnormal cholangiograms (92.2%). Results: The mean operating time for all patients undergoing LC with or without cholangiograms or LCBDE or other additional surgery was 56.9 min. Mean length of stay was 22.1 h. The mean operating time for LC only patients (n = 2530)—that is, those not undergoing LCBDE or any other additional procedure—was 47.6 min; their mean postoperative length of stay was 17.2 h. Ductal exploration was performed via the cystic duct in 269 patients, (82.5%) and through a choledochotomy in 57 patients (17.5%). T-tubes were used in patients in whom there was concern for possible retained debris or stones, distal spasm, pancreatitis, or general poor tissue quality secondary to malnutrition or infection. In cases where choledochotomy was used, a T-tube was placed in 38 patients (67%), and primary closure without a T-tube was done in 19 (33%). There were no complications in the group of patients who underwent choledochotomy and primary ductal closure without T-tube placement or in the group in whom T-tubes were placed. Conclusions: Common bile duct (CBD) stones still occur in 10% of patients. These stones are identified by IOC. IOC can be performed in >96.4% of cases of LC. LCBDE was successful in clearing these stones in 97.2% of patients in whom it was attempted and in 92.2% of all patients with normal IOCs. Most LCBDEs in this series were performed via the cystic duct because of the stone characteristics and ductal anatomy. Selective laparoscopic placement of T-tubes in patients requiring choledochotomy (67%) appears to be a safe and effective alternative to routine T-tube drainage of the ductal system. ERCP, which was required for 5.8% of patients with abnormal cholangiograms, and open CBDE, which was used in 2.0%, still play an important role in the management of common bile duct pathology. The role of ERCP, with or without sphincterotomy, has returned to its status in the prelaparoscopic era. LCBDE may be employed successfully in the vast majority of patients harboring CBD stones.