Mechanical lithotripsy of large common bile duct stones using a basket.

Experience with the Olympus basket mechanical lithotriptor (BML-1Q) in crushing large common bile duct stones before their endoscopic removal is reported. From January 1988 to January 1990, 68 patients with common duct stones too large to be extracted by Dormia baskets or balloon catheters after sphincterotomy were treated with the BML system. The largest stones in each patient ranged from 1.0 to 4.9 cm in diameter. Fifty-seven patients required one session of lithotripsy, ten patients two sessions and one patient three sessions; 26 patients required further endoscopic extraction of stone fragments after successful lithotripsy. The stones were successfully crushed by the BML system and the ducts cleared in 55 patients (81 per cent). In 13 patients mechanical lithotripsy failed because the stones could not be engaged in the lithotriptor basket. In one patient the stone was crushed with the Soehendra lithotriptor, six patients were successfully managed by electrohydraulic lithotripsy through a 'mother and baby' endoscope, indwelling stents were inserted in four patients and two patients underwent surgery.     

Percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic lithotripsy

Since 1983, 14 patients with intrahepatic and common bile duct stones have undergone percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic lithotripsy because the stones were too large to be removed using ordinary percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy. Stones were completely fragmented in seven cases (six with intrahepatic stones and one with common bile duct stone) and partially disrupted in five cases with intrahepatic stones. Intrahepatic duct angulation and stricture was the factor most often responsible for failure. All the disintegrated stones were removed by subsequent transhepatic cholangioscopy. Amongst the seven patients with complete stone fragmentation, six stones were found with electrohydraulic shock-wave lithotripsy and one with NdYAG laser lithotripsy. Complications of percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic lithotripsy using electrohydraulic shock waves were found in three cases, two had transient haemobilia and one had fever and chills after the procedures. They all recovered by conservative treatment. NdYAG laser treatment was expensive, time consuming and inconvenient to use. Percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic lithotripsy by using electrohydraulic shock wave is an effective and safe method to fragment biliary stones and to facilitate their removal.     

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。     

钬激光碎石术与气压弹道碎石术治疗胆道术后残余结石临床比较

目的比较钬激光碎石术与气压弹道碎石术治疗胆道术后残余结石的临床疗效。方法使用钬激光碎石治疗85例胆道术后残余结石患者;气压弹道碎石术治疗85例胆道术后残余结石患者。结果85例使用钬激光碎石治疗的患者一次手术结石粉碎率为96.4%,平均手术时间为25min。而气压弹道碎石组中上述各项指标分别为78.8%;平均手术时间为49min,均与钬激光碎石组有明显差异。结论钬激光碎石效明显优于气压弹道碎石,是治疗胆道术后残余结石一种安全、有效的碎石方法。     

胆道镜激光碎石治疗胆道结石嵌顿

目的 探讨术中胆道镜下激光碎石在治疗胆道结石嵌顿的临床价值。方法 回顾分析2005年8月至2007年12月术中肝胆管结石及胆总管结石嵌顿的临床资料。结果术中使用激光碎石后,胆总管结石组无胆管损伤,无残石病例;肝胆管结石组2例术后残石者均经T管窦道取出,残石1例,最终残石率为6．25％。结论 胆道镜下激光碎石在治疗胆道结石嵌顿具有直观、准确、方便、疗效确切的特点,是降低残石率避免更人手术创伤的重要手段。     

219例肝内胆管结石的外科治疗

目的:总结并评价肝内胆管结石的外科手术治疗效果。方法:单纯胆道探查T管引流72例,肝叶(段)切除和胆肠内引流109例,胆总管切开并胆道镜钬激光碎石术取石 T管引流38例。结果:总治疗优良率83.8%,并发症率15.1%,死亡率0.5%,结石残石率14.1%。胆总管切开合并胆道镜碎石术应用者明显优于其他组。结论:充分利用先进的诊疗技术,选择合理的术式,保留Oddi括约肌功能,可有效提高治疗效果,降低并发症及残石率。     

Nonoperative removal of giant common bile duct calculi

Endoscopic sphincterotomy has allowed us to extract relatively large stones from the common bile duct as compared with other methods utilizing a T-tube tract or the percutaneous transhepatic route. Twenty-four patients with large stones over 20 mm in diameter were selected and reviewed from a series of 469 sphincterotomy patients. Eleven stones passed into the duodenum spontaneously, the maximal size of which was 30 by 43 mm. Passage occurred within 4 days after sphincterotomy in 27 percent, 5 to 7 days after the procedure in 55 percent, and 8 to 13 days after the procedure in 18 percent and was accompanied by cholangitis in 55 percent of the patients. The small diameter of the stone and common bile duct dilatation down to the distal end seemed to be the factors favoring stone delivery. Five stones were removed using ordinary basket catheters by duodenoscopy; however, the largest one required 28 attempts. More recently, four stones were efficiently extracted after destruction by electrohydraulic or mechanical lithotripsy. Failure of removal in five patients was mainly due to a lack of space around the stone for basket manipulation or occurrence of severe cholangitis. Further refinements in technique in this regard are needed.     

小切口经超细胆道镜双频激光碎石术治疗胆总管嵌顿结石

目的探讨小切口下经超细胆道镜U-100激光碎石术治疗胆总管嵌顿结石的应用价值。方法2003年3月～2005年3月，在小切口胆总管探查术中应用经超细胆道镜U-100激光碎石术治疗68例胆总管嵌顿结石，其中胆总管切开探查39例，经胆囊管探查29例。结果68例手术均获成功，一次性结石取净率98．5％（67／68），无胆道损伤、胆道出血等并发症。结论该治疗方法创伤小，碎石充分，并发症少，安全可行，是治疗胆总管嵌顿结石的一种可选择的手术方法。     

胆道镜联合钬激光碎石治疗术后难取性肝内胆管结石

目的探讨胆道镜联合钬激光碎石治疗术后肝内胆管难取性结石的价值。方法2010年7月～2012年7月,采用纤维胆道镜下用钬激光碎石治疗术后肝内胆管难取性结石（嵌顿结石或结石〉1em）37例,功率0．8—1．2J／5～10Hz。结果37例行钬激光碎石1～12次,平均2．6次。1例因结石位于四级胆管,胆道镜无法进入,未完全取净,36例结石全部取净,成功率为97．3％（36／37）,碎石过程中无胆管壁灼伤、胆道穿孔。36例结石取净者术后随访3～25个月,平均12．3月,B超复查未发现结石复发。结论对于术后肝内胆管难取性结石,胆道镜下钬激光碎石是一种安全、有效的方法。     

腹腔镜下胆总管低位切开与腹腔镜下钬激光碎石治疗胆总管下段嵌顿结石的回顾性分析

目的研究腹腔镜下胆总管低位切开与腹腔镜下钬激光碎石治疗胆总管下段嵌顿结石的临床疗效。方法收集我院2013年5月至2016年5月60例胆总管下段嵌顿结石患者病历资料,进行回顾性分析。根据手术方式不同将患者分为腹腔镜组与传统开腹组,每组30例。腹腔镜组采用腹腔镜下胆总管低位切开与腹腔镜下钬激光碎石,传统开腹组采用开腹胆总管切开取石。比较两组应激指标、术中指标、术后恢复情况、并发症与复发率。结果腹腔镜组取石时间、术中出血量、肛门排气时间、住院时间分别为(7.87±2.52)min、(36.41±9.21)ml、(1.63±0.68)d、(10.86±2.53)d显著低于传统开腹组的(13.25±3.67)min、(82.13±24.75)ml、(2.60±0.91)d、(15.77±4.41)d(P0.05),结石残留率、切口感染率、胆瘘发生率、结石复发率分别为3.3%、0·0%、3.3%、6.7%显著低于传统开腹组的20.0%、13.3%。20.0%、26.7%(P0.05)。结论腹腔镜下胆总管低位切开与腹腔镜钬激光治疗胆总管下段嵌顿结石,可以有效清除结石,对机体损伤较轻,术后并发症较少,有利于患者术后康复。     

腹腔镜联合十二指肠镜治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石效果分析

目的 探讨腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)联合内镜Oddi括约肌切开取石术(EST)治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床效果.方法 回顾性分析2003年5月-2009年6月,LC与EST联合治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石78例临床资料.首先经EST取出胆管结石,5 d内行LC.结果 EST成功76例(97%),失效2例,1例因胆管末端狭窄,开腹行胆肠吻合术治愈;1例胆总管结石直径1.6 cm,质硬,机械性碎石失败,开腹行胆总管切开取石T管引流术.76例腹腔镜手术成功,无明显出血、胆漏等严重并发症.结论 EST+LC联合治疗胆囊结石并胆总管结石具有创伤小、恢复快、并发症少及无需T管引流等优点,是一种安全有效的治疗方法.     

Electrohydraulic shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) fragmentation of retained common duct stones

Retained or recurrent stones in the common bile duct remain a clinical problem in 2% to 5% of patients undergoing cholecystectomy. Nonoperative extraction via the T tube tract or endoscopic sphincterotomy is successful in 85% to 95% of patients; however, the remainder require reoperation. This study evaluates the efficacy of electrohydraulic shock wave lithotripsy therapy of common duct stones too large to be extracted endoscopically or by T tube. Six patients were entered into the study. Ages ranged from 62 to 93 years. All patients either had severe preexisting systemic disorders or were of an advanced age. Stones ranged in size from 10 to 41 mm, with a mean largest dimension of 22 mm. In all patients either extraction by traditional nonoperative means failed or there was a stone that was considered to be too large to be extracted successfully. Patients were treated with 1200 to 2400 shocks at 16 to 20 kV. Five of six patients were treated with local anesthesia and sedation. Stones were successfully fragmented in all but one patient. Five patients required extraction of the remaining fragments either through the T tube tract (one patient) or via endoscopic sphincterotomy. All patients were free of stones at discharge, with the exception of one patient with severe cirrhosis who had an intrahepatic stone behind a right hepatic duct stricture. This stone had been successfully fragmented but an endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatogram revealed some residual fragments despite normal alkaline phosphatase and bilirubin values. There were no hospital deaths, although the patient with the intrahepatic stone died of bleeding varices several months later. Electrohydraulic shock wave lithotripsy seems to be an effective adjuvant treatment in clearing the bile duct of stones that would otherwise require reoperation.     

输尿管镜气压弹道碎石技术在肝胆管结石中的应用体会

目的探讨一种新技术即用输尿管镜气压弹道碎石技术治疗肝胆管结石的疗效。方法回顾性分析2010年1月-2014年10月36例术中采用输尿管镜气压弹道碎石治疗肝胆管结石病患者的资料。结果胆总管结石肝总管结石一次性取净结石率100%（12/12）。二级以上肝胆管结石一次性取净结石率66.7%（24/36）。结石残余术后采用经T管瘘道输尿管镜＋气压弹道碎石取石12例,33.3%（12/36）。肝内结石碎石后结石下移,阻塞肝外胆管2例5.56%（2/36）,术中配合胆道镜网篮取石3例8.33%（3/36）,切口感染4例11.1%（4/36）,胆瘘、腹腔局限性腹膜炎2例5.56%（2/36）,无胆道狭窄、穿孔、出血。结论采用输尿管镜气压弹道碎石治疗肝胆管结石具有操作简单、取石快、残石率低、并发症少、费用低等优点,为临床提供了一种治疗肝胆结石的新方法,有推广应用价值。     

联合应用利胆排石药物治疗胆总管细小结石可行性分析

目的探讨联合应用利胆、排石药物对胆总管细小结石的治疗作用，以期提高其非手术治疗效果。 方法回顾性分析2014年11月至2018年1月北京电力医院联合应用利胆（33%硫酸镁）、排石（颠茄片、山莨菪碱）药物治疗41例胆总管细小结石（直径≤8 mm，数量≤3个）患者的临床资料。 结果41例患者排石成功率为73.17%（30/41），其中排石成功组30例（合并急性胆囊炎2例，6.67%），排石数量为1~3（1.1±0.4）个，排石时间为3~16（6.0±3.7） d，住院时间为3~23（12.7±5.2） d，排石失败组11例（合并急性胆囊炎5例，45.45%），排石数量为1~2（1.2±0.4）个，排石时间为5~14（9.4±3.5）d，住院时间为10~23（15.8±4.1）d，两组排石数量及住院时间对比，差异无统计学意义（t=0.086，P=0.032；t=2.014，P=0.051），但排石失败组合并急性胆囊炎比例较高，排石时间明显延长（χ²=6.033，P=0.024；t=2.522，P=0.016）。排石成功组患者排石后的肝功能指标如丙氨酸氨基转移酶（ALT）、天门冬氨酸氨基转移酶（AST）、总胆红素（TBil）、结合胆红素（DBil）、γ-谷氨酰转肽酶（GGT）、碱性磷酸酶（ALP），均较排石前显著降低（t=3.369、4.957、5.112、5.231、2.264、2.422，均P<0.05）。随访6~18个月，41例患者肝功能正常，均无胆总管结石复发或再生。 结论联合应用利胆、排石药物可促进胆总管细小结石排入十二指肠，降低手术治疗胆总管细小结石概率，既可作为胆总管细小结石的非手术治疗方法，又可作为胆总管结石的术前准备措施，以期最大限度地简化治疗手段，减轻患者痛苦，减少治疗隐患。     

微创技术在腹腔镜胆囊切除术后黄疸诊治中的应用

目的：探讨微创技术在腹腔镜胆囊切除术（LC）后黄疸的诊断与治疗中的作用。方法：在微创观念指导下，对LC术后出现黄疸的患者运用内镜逆行胰胆管造影（ERCP）和内镜括约肌切开（EST）等微创技术进行诊断与治疗。结果：我院1998年8月至2001年5月间共行3160例LC手术，术后出现黄疸者5例，均先接受B超、ERCP检查，提示胆总管结石与胆总管末端狭窄，3例EST取石一次成功，1例首次EST取石失败后予保守治疗5天后再行ERCP与碎石治疗成功，1例因结石较多较大行开腹胆总管探查术。结论：对LC术后黄疸，在B超等检查排除明显胆道损伤和胆漏后，胆总管结石应首先考虑。ERCP可进一步明确诊断，EST取石或碎石这一微创技术治疗胆道细小结石伴有胆总管末端炎性狭窄引起的梗阻效果良好。     

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with endoscopic sphincterotomy and stone extraction or laparoscopic choledochoscopy and electrohydraulic lithotripsy for management of cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis

Summary Six hundred twenty-two laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed at St. Vincent Hospital over a 14-month period. We reviewed the records of 366 of these patients who were referred to the authors. Thirty-six patients had suspected choledocholithiasis. The primary author (M.E.A.) performed 38 endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCPs) on these patients for diagnosis and management. Seventeen of the 36 patients had common bile duct stones; 19 patients had negative studies. Of the 17 patients with choledocholithiasis, 15 had successful cannulation of the common bile duct, and, of these, 10 underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus endoscopic sphincterotomy and extraction of the common duct stone(s). In one high-risk elderly patient, we extracted the stone from the common duct and left the gallbladder in situ. Two patients failed endoscopic cannulation and underwent open cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration. Four additional patients, cannulated successfully, had unsuccessful endoscopic stone removal because the stones were too large or were impacted. Two of these patients underwent open cholecystectomy and common duct exploration. The two other patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy and choledochoscopy through the cystic duct with the flexible choledochoscope. An electrohydraulic lithotripsy probe was then inserted through the choledochoscope to fragment the stones, and stone fragments were allowed to pass through the previously created sphincterotomy. We believe our data, supported by data in the literature, show that these alternative methods for treating choledocholithiasis are safe and effective and should be considered primary modalities for treating this condition now that laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the treatment of choice for cholelithiasis.     

A stratified intraoperative surgical strategy is mandatory during laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for common bile duct stones

Background: Open exploration and endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) remain the preferred treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS). The recent spread of laparoscopy has worsened the dilemna of choosing between surgical and endoscopic treatment of CBDS. The aim of this study was to critically evaluate the results of our preliminary experience with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (CBDE) for CBDS. Methods: Ninety-two consecutive patients were prospectively submitted to laparoscopic CBDE. Surgical strategy included an initial transcystic approach or laparoscopic choledochotomy. Failure of stone clearance was managed by conversion to open CBDE or by postoperative ES. Electrohydraulic lithotripsy and papillary balloon dilatation were selectively used. Stone clearance was assessed by choledochoscopy and control cholangiography. Results: The overall laparoscopic stone clearance in this series was 84% (transcystic route 63% and choledochotomy 93%). Conversion to laparotomy was mandatory in 12% of the patients because of incomplete stone clearance and in 5% because of intraoperative complications. Postoperative ES was required in 4% of the patients, giving an overall surgical success rate of 96%. When indicated (small and limited number of stones located below the cysticocholedochal junction, with a dilated and patent cystic duct) the transcystic route had the lower success rate, the higher complication rate, and the shorter operative time and postoperative hospital stay. When indicated (accessible and dilated common bile duct over 7 mm), laparoscopic choledochotomy had the higher success rate, the lower complication rate, the longer operative time, and the longer postoperative hospital stay, which is related to associated external biliary drainage. The hospital mortality included two high-risk patients (2%) and the complications rate was 15%. Conclusions: Laparoscopic CBDE is safe in selected patients. A stratified intraoperative surgical strategy is mandatory in deciding between a transcystic route and choledochotomy with specific indications for each approach. When feasible, laparoscopic choledochotomy is more efficient and safe than the transcystic route, but it is associated with a longer postoperative hospital stay, which is due to external biliary drainage. Received: 7 May 1996/Accepted: 19 November 1996     

Choledochoscopic lithotripsy is a useful adjunct to laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for hepatolithiasis: a cohort study

Background

This study aims to investigate the role of combining choledochoscopic lithotripsy with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for hepatolithiasis in patients who are not suitable for hepatectomy.

Methods

From March 2009 to March 2013, 86 patients with hepatolithiasis irrespective of whether they underwent a choledochoscopic plasma shock wave lithotripsy or not were analyzed.

Results

Sixty-two patients underwent lithotripsy and 24 patients underwent basket lithoextraction intraoperatively. Plasma shock wave lithotripsy did not lengthen the operating time, but decreased the postoperative residual stone rate and reduced the frequency of postoperative choledochoscopic lithotomy for patients with remnant stones. The overall final stone clearance rate was 98.8%. During a mean follow-up of 26.2 months, recurrent stones and cholangiocarcinoma developed in 1 patient, respectively.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration combined with choledochoscopic lithotripsy is a definitive procedure for hepatolithiasis in patients who are not candidates for hepatectomy.     

Biliary lithotripsy as an adjunct to laparoscopic common bile duct stone extraction

Summary We investigated various energy sources and delivery systems suitable for fragmentation of common duct calculi by a laparoscopic technique. We evaluated electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) using 1.9-Fr probe delivering 80 W and laser lithotripsy using a 200-m fiber delivering 30–70 mJ/pulse at 5–20 Hz. In vitro biliary stone fragmentation analysis suggested that the laser lithotripsy produced a more controllable fragmentation than EHL. Initial attempts to employ EHL techniques in animal models resulted in common bile duct injury or inadequate fragmentation of stones. In contrast, biliary lithotripsy was accomplished in pigs using the pulsed-dye laser at 10 Hz and 60 mJ/pulse. Histologic evaluation revealed no evidence of ductal injury related to laser stone fragmentation. Subsequently, laser common duct lithotripsy was used in two human subjects. One patient had a 1.8-cm impacted ampullary stone and one patient had a 3-cm intrahepatic stone. In both cases, the stones were removed laparoscopically after laser fragmentation. Our experience suggests that the laser lithotripsy may facilitate laparoscopic common duct stone extraction procedures.     

双频激光碎石在腔镜外科难取性胆管结石中的应用(附23例报告)

目的探讨双频激光碎石治疗腔镜外科难取性胆管结石的疗效及安全性. 方法 2002年1月～2004年6月,对23例难取性胆管结石进行双频激光碎石治疗.其中腹腔镜胆道探查术中应用14例,术后胆道镜取石中应用9例. 结果 19例取净胆管中结石,结石取净率为82.6%(19/23),无胆管损伤、窦道损伤等并发症. 结论双频激光碎石具有创伤小、效率高、并发症少的优点,对腔镜外科难取性胆管结石是一种可选择的有效方法.