腹腔镜下经胆囊管切开胆总管取石胆道一期缝合术

目的探讨腹腔镜下经胆囊管切开胆总管取石,胆道一期缝合治疗胆总管结石的可行性。方法 2009年10月～2010年5月对55例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石施行经胆囊管切开胆总管取石胆道一期缝合术。腹腔镜下切除胆囊后,保留胆囊管长1.0～1.5 cm,沿胆囊管纵轴剪开胆囊管前壁至胆总管,再沿胆总管纵轴向下切开胆总管0.3～1.1 cm,经此切口内镜取净胆道结石并判断Oddi括约肌功能是否正常。从胆总管切开处的下方开始,向胆囊管切开处的盲端方向先行黏膜层缝合,然后肌层缝合,距胆总管0.2 cm结扎胆囊管。腹腔放置引流管。结果 55例手术均获成功,胆囊管直径0.3～0.6cm,平均0.45 cm;胆囊管切开长度1.0～1.5 cm,平均1.3 cm;胆总管切开长度0.3～1.1 cm,平均0.5 cm。腹腔引流管留置3～5 d。术前术后MRCP对比胆总管直径无异常改变。1例术后出现胆漏,对症治疗后治愈。术后腹痛、腹胀2例,48 h后缓解。1例术后5 d出现间歇性腹痛,7 d出现黄疸,9 d后腹痛缓解,黄疸消退。术后住院时间7～13 d,平均8 d。55例术后随访1～6个月,平均4.5月,无残余结石及结石复发。结论腹腔镜下经胆囊管切开胆总管取石胆道一期缝合术治疗胆总管结石可行。     

腹腔镜下经胆囊管切开取石与胆总管切开取石胆道一期缝合术的对比研究

目的应用腹腔镜技术经胆囊管切开取石、胆道一期缝合与经胆总管切开取石、胆道一期缝合治疗肝外胆管结石,对比分析两种术式在胆漏发生等方面的优劣,探讨经胆囊管切开胆总管取石、胆道一期缝合治疗肝外胆管结石的可行性。方法2011年1月～2012年10月,应用腹腔镜微创手术治疗胆总管结石118例,其中适合行一期缝合的患者按手术顺序的奇偶分为经胆囊管切开胆总管取石、胆道一期缝合组（实验组）与经胆总管切开取石、胆道一期缝合组（对照组）,每组59例。比较2组胆总管切开长度、胆道镜探查情况及残石率、一期缝合时间、胆漏发生率等。结果均在腹腔镜下顺利完成手术。实验组胆总管切开长度明显短于对照组[（8．2±2．2）mmvs．（13．8±2．9）mm,t=-11．772,P=0．000]。实验组胆道镜向肝总管探查失败率22％（13／59）,1例发生胆总管末端残留结石;对照组胆道镜探查顺利,胆总管及肝总管内无残留结石。一期缝合时间实验组长于对照组[（25．5±7．2）min vs．（10．3±4．1）min,t=14．074,P=0．000],但在总手术时间上2组差异无显著性[（85．5±20．9）minvs．（81．8±18．6）min,t=1．009,P=0．232）。实验组术后胆漏发生率明显低于对照组[3．4％（2／59）vs ．15．3％（9／59）,x^2=4．912,P=0．027];实验组术后引流量明显少于对照组[（20．7±5．4）ml vs．（50．2±20．6）ml,t=-10．640,P=0．000]。结论腹腔镜下经胆囊管切开取石一期缝合较胆总管切开取石胆道一期缝合更为安全、微创、可行。     

腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合的临床治疗体会

目的观察和探讨腹腔镜肝总管切开取石在肝胆管结石中的临床应用疗效。方法肝胆管结石治疗的80例患者资料进行回顾和分析,随机分成研究组和对照组,研究组采用腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合手术治疗,对照组则采用腹腔镜胆总管切开取石T管引流术治疗,并将两组间的临床治疗效果进行对比。结果经临床比较可见,两组患者的胆总管胆汁漏的发生率差异无统计学意义(P0.05);研究组患者的恢复进食时间、住院时间和治疗费用明显少于对照组,组间比较差异明显,具有统计学意义,(P0.05)。结论对于胆总管直径1.0 cm患者,术中胆道镜确认无残留结石者采用一期缝合的效果满意,且有效减少住院时间和降低治疗费用。     

腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术的体会

目的探讨腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术的手术技巧及经验。方法回顾性分析2010年6月至2015年6月间在湖南医药学院第一附属医院住院的490例拟应用腹腔镜行胆总管切开取石一期缝合术的病人资料,总结手术经验及技巧。结果490例病人中有420例成功行腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术,平均手术时间为96 min,术中平均出血为22.5 ml,术后发生胆汁漏26例,合并胆总管残余结石1例。结论腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术在技术上是完全可行的,优化的操作流程、丰富的胆道镜观察经验、娴熟的缝合技术可有效缩短手术时间。     

腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术的临床体会

目的:探讨腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术的优点、方法及适应证。方法:回顾分析用腹腔镜及纤维胆道镜为26例胆总管结石患者行腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术的临床资料,不置"T"管引流,一期缝合胆总管壁。结果:23例手术成功,平均手术时间96.4min,术中平均出血17.2ml,术后平均肛门排气时间20.1h,术后平均住院10.2d,5例胆漏,胆漏量20~60ml,引流3~7d后痊愈,余均无严重并发症发生。3例行腹腔镜胆总管切开取石"T"管引流术。结论:应用腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术治疗胆总管结石具有患者创伤小、住院时间短及并发症少等优势,对符合适应证的患者是一种安全、有效的术式,但应掌握操作技巧以提高手术成功率,防止胆漏。     

分层缝合在腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术中的应用

目的：探讨分层缝合在腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术中的应用价值。方法回顾性分析我院2007年3月～2013年3月216例腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术,按胆总管缝合方法分为2组：单层缝合组127例和分层缝合组89例,比较2组患者术后胆漏发生率、术后住院时间。结果2组手术均顺利,无中转开腹。2组患者手术时间无显著差异（t＝-0．931,P＝0．353）,分层缝合组术后住院时间（5．9±1．7） d,明显短于单层缝合组（7．7±1．8） d（t＝7．400,P＝0．000）。分层缝合组术后胆漏发生率3．4％（3／89）,显著低于单层缝合组20．5％（26／127）（χ2＝13．167,P＝0．000）。单层缝合组合并急性胆管炎患者术后胆漏发生率明显高于非急性胆管炎患者[45．4％（10／22） vs．15．2％（16／105）,χ2＝8．429,P＝0．004];分层缝合组合并急性胆管炎患者术后胆漏发生率与非急性胆管炎患者无显著差异[7．1％（1／14） vs．2．7％（2／75）,χ2＝0．002,P＝0．964]。结论分层缝合可明显减少腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术后胆漏,避免术后胆漏可能引起的并发症,缩短住院时间,扩大腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术的适应证。     

腹腔镜下经胆囊管切开胆总管取石一期缝合的配合体会

腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石T型管引流术国内外临床均有应用[1]。近年来腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石胆道一期缝合术也屡见报道[2]。一期缝合时,为确保胆总管下端开口处的通畅,于术前或术中需放置鼻胆管引流,     

腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术50例临床分析

目的探讨腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术的可行性及适应症。方法回顾分析2006年5月至2013年6月为50例患者行腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术的临床资料。结果 50例手术均获成功,手术时间70~240 min,平均105 min。术后住院6~21 d,平均11 d。5例胆漏,胆漏量20~100 ml。引流4~8 d后拔管,余均无严重并发症反生,随访未见结石残留、胆管狭窄。结论在正确掌握手术适应症及注意手术操作的前提下,有选择地开展腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术是安全、可行的。     

腹腔镜经胆囊管切开胆总管取石胆道一期缝合术的围手术期护理

胆总管切开探查,放置T管已是经典的传统手术,我院于1997年开展腹腔镜胆总管结石的微创手术。随着腹腔镜缝合技术水平的不断提高及胆道镜探查经验的积累,于2009年10月开展了腹腔镜胆道探查、胆总管一期缝合术,2009年10月至2010年10月,我院行腹腔镜经胆囊管切开胆总管取石胆道一期缝合治疗胆总管结石150例,现报道如下。     

腹腔镜胆总管切开一期缝合术的临床应用

目的探讨腹腔镜胆总管切开取石后一期缝合术治疗胆总管结石的可行性。方法对2003年2月至2010年11月实施的50例腹腔镜胆总管探查并一期缝合的患者资料进行分析。结果平均手术时间105min,术中平均出血量35ml,其中胆瘘1例,腹腔内出血1例,平均住院时间5d,术后随访6个月～4年,未见胆道残余及胆管狭窄。结论胆总管一期缝合术治疗胆总管结石安全有效、患者痛苦小、术后恢复快,用腹腔镜行此手术更具有微创的优点,值得推广。     

腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术(附29例报告)

目的:探讨腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术的优点、方法及适应证。方法:应用腹腔镜手术设备及纤维胆道镜为29例胆总管结石患者行腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术,不置T管引流,一期缝合胆总管壁。结果:26例手术成功,平均手术时间98.2m in,术中平均出血15.3m l,术后平均肛门排气时间19.6h,术后平均住院8.3d,无胆漏等严重并发症发生,3例中转行腹腔镜胆总管切开取石T管引流术。结论:应用腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术治疗胆管结石具有创伤小、住院时间短及并发症少的优势,对符合适应证的患者是一种安全、有效的术式,但应掌握操作技巧以提高手术成功率、防止胆漏的发生。     

A randomized comparison of primary closure and T-tube drainage of the common bile duct after laparoscopic choledochotomy

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, the common bile duct (CBD) has been closed with T-tube drainage after laparoscopic choledochotomy and removal of CBD stones. However, insertion of the T-tube is related to some potential postoperative complications, and patients must carry the T-tube for several weeks before its removal. Primary closure of the CBD without drainage has been proposed as a safe alternative to T-tube placement after laparoscopic choledochotomy. This randomized study aimed to compare the postoperative course and final outcome between the two methods applied after LCBDE. METHODS: Between January 2000 and January 2004, 80 patients treated with laparoscopic choledochotomy for CBD stones were randomly assigned to primary duct closure (n = 40) or T-tube drainage (n = 40). The primary end points were morbidity, operative time, postoperative stay, hospital expenses, and time until return to work. RESULTS: There were no differences in the demographic characteristics or clinical presentations between the two groups. In the primary closure group, the postoperative stay (5.2 +/- 2.2 vs 8.3 +/- 3.6 days) and the time until return to work (12.6 +/- 5.1 vs 20.4 +/- 13.2 days) were significantly shorter, the hospital expenses (8,638 +/- 2,946 vs 12,531 +/- 4,352 yuan) were significantly lower, and the incidences of postoperative complications (15% vs 27.5%) and biliary complications (10% vs 20%) were statistically and insignificantly lower than in the T-tube drainage group. In the primary closure group, six patients experienced postoperative complications, four of whom had biliary complications, compared, respectively, with 11 and 8 patients in the T-tube drainage group. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that primary CBC closure after laparoscopic choledochotomy was a viable alternative to mandatory T-tube drainage.     

腹腔镜胆总管探查取石一期缝合术的临床分析

目的探讨腹腔镜胆总管探查取石一期缝合术的方法、适应证及并发症。方法回顾性分析2004年1月至2010年1月78例行腹腔镜胆总管探查取石一期缝合术患者的临床资料。结果 78例患者均成功完成腹腔镜胆总管探查取石一期缝合术,术后无结石残留。7例患者发生胆瘘,均经术中常规放置的腹腔引流管引流治愈;术后胰腺炎2例,经保守治疗后痊愈。结论腹腔镜胆总管探查取石一期缝合术是安全可行的,但必须严格掌握适应证。     

腹腔镜胆总管探查一期缝合术治疗复发性胆总管结石的临床分析

目的探讨腹腔镜胆总管探查(laparoscopic common bile duct exploration,LCBDE)一期缝合术治疗复发性胆总管结石的可行性和安全性。方法回顾性分析2010年1月至2014年6月间行LCBDE一期缝合术的45例复发性胆总管结石病人的临床资料。结果 45例病人无中转开腹及围手术期死亡病例。术中2例分别损伤横结肠、十二指肠球部浆膜。手术时间为76~155 min,平均(108.5±35.4)min;术中出血量为10~115 ml,平均(35.6±10.5)ml;术后肛门排气时间为1~4d,平均(1.2±0.5)d;术后住院时间为5~15 d,平均(7.2±3.2)d。术后并发症总发生率为6.25%(3/48),其中胆漏2例,高淀粉酶血症1例,均经保守治疗后治愈;无再手术病例。43例病人完成术后1年随访,随访率为93.75%,均经影像学检查证实无胆管狭窄、胆管残留结石或结石复发等并发症。结论选择性LCBDE一期缝合术治疗复发性胆总管结石是安全有效的,短期预后良好。但术者需具备丰富的腹腔镜操作经验,并灵活地把握手术适应证。     

腹腔镜胆总管探查胆管Ⅰ期缝合的经验(附57例报告)

【摘要】目的 总结腹腔镜下胆总管探查(LCBDE)术后胆总管I期缝合的经验。方法 回顾性分析我们连续57例腹腔镜下胆总管I期缝合的临床资料。结果 所有57例患者手术均获成功,平均手术时间62±27 min,平均术后住院时间6±3 d,术后均无胆漏,随访期间无胆管狭窄及结石残留等并发症。结论 掌握好适应症,腹腔镜下胆总管I期缝合安全,可靠。     

Comparison of laparoscopic choledochotomy closure techniques

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (CBDE) has traditionally been accompanied by T-tube drainage. However, other methods of choledochotomy closures have been reported. This study compared three laparoscopic methods of choledochotomy closure in a prospective, randomized fashion to determine which method should be the preferred technique. METHODS: In this porcine model, 24 animals initially underwent laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) clipping to simulate an obstruction. Two days later, the animals underwent laparoscopic clip removal and simulated CBDE through a 1.5-cm choledochotomy. The animals were then randomized to one of three groups: primary choledochotomy closure (group I), antegrade CBD stenting with primary closure (group II), or T-tube placement (group III). To assess for CBD stenoses and leaks, the animals were killed 2 months postoperatively, at which time a cholangiogram was performed and the bile duct harvested. The ratio of proximal CBD to choledochotomy site was assessed radiographically and histologically. RESULTS: The operative time was significantly longer in group III (200 +/- 13 min, p < 0.05) than in group I (141 +/- 17 min) and group II (154 +/- 16 min). The ratio of the proximal CBD diameter to the choledochotomy site diameter by cholangiogram was 2.1:1.0 in group I, to 1.2:1.0 in group II, and 1.1:1.0 in group III (p < 0.01). The ratio of the proximal CBD intraluminal area to the choledochotomy site intraluminal area was 2.1:1.0 in group I compared to 1.1:1.0 in groups II and III (p < 0.01). None of the animals developed jaundice or sepsis. CONCLUSION: Significant stenoses were present at the choledochotomy site in the primary closure group, and T-tube placement resulted in prolonged operative times. We conclude that laparoscopic antegrade CBD stenting with primary closure of the choledochotomy site is the preferred technique after choledochotomy in an animal model. Further assessment in a clinical trial is warranted.     

腹腔镜胆总管探查术中即时缝合胆总管切口427例体会

目的总结运用腹腔镜胆总管探查即时缝合术的治疗经验。方法1992年6月至2003年12月，我们运用腹腔镜胆总管探查即时缝合术(胆道镜取石术，扩张术，经胆囊管细导管外引流术，胆总管支架内引流术)，对427例病人进行治疗。结果405例手术获成功(94．8％)，4例残石经内镜取石治愈，4例残石内镜未取净，11例胆漏经腹腔引流管或内镜鼻胆管引流治愈，2例细导管脱落，1例胰头癌术后15d死亡。其他并发症均经非手术综合疗法治愈。结论选择合适病例，腹腔镜胆总管探查即时缝合术是安全可行的。     

腹腔镜下胆总管切开探查一期缝合术后胆漏相关因素的Logistic回归分析

【摘要】 目的 探讨腹腔镜下胆总管切开一期缝合术后胆漏发生的相关因素。方法 通过对我院收治的腹腔镜下胆总管切开一期缝合术后发生胆漏的19例患者和52例未发生胆漏的对照者进行病例对照研究,以多因素非条件Logistic回归法分析相关的危险因素。结果 一期缝合术后胆漏的发生与体重指数、胆总管切开方式、白蛋白、糖尿病有关,两组间比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),与性别、年龄及手术时间无关(P>0.05),多因素Logistic回归分析结果显示,胆总管切开方式、白蛋白、体重指数是是胆总管切开一期缝合术后发生胆漏的主要危险因素,而胆总管切开方式对术后胆漏的发生影响最大。结论 严格把握适应症及正确的手术操作是减少一期缝合术后胆漏发生的关键。     

Long-term results after laparoscopic transverse choledochotomy for common bile duct stones

Background The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term results of laparoscopic transverse choledochotomy (TC) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).Methods Ductal stones were present in 344 of 3,212 patients (10.7%) who underwent LC. The procedure was completed laparoscopically in 329 cases (95.6%), with a TC in 138 cases (41.9%) (the subjects of this study), and with a transcystic duct approach in 191 cases (58.1%).Results Biliary drainage was used in 131 of 138 cases (94.9%). There were major complications in eight patients (5.7%), and one patient died (0.7%). Retained stones were seen in 11 cases (8%). None of the patients was lost to follow-up (mean, 72.3 months; range, 11–145). Ductal stones recurred in five patients (3.6%). No signs of bile stasis and no biliary strictures were observed. In all, 121 patients are alive with no biliary symptoms; 16 have died from unrelated causes.Conclusion Long-term follow-up after laparoscopic TC during LC proved its safety and efficacy.