二孔法微型腹腔镜胆囊切除术的临床应用

目的:探讨二孔法微型腹腔镜在胆囊切除术中使用的临床意义,术式和进一步提高腹腔镜操作技术。方法:随机将慢性结石性胆囊炎和胆囊息肉40例分成两组,分别施行二孔微型腹腔镜胆囊切除术(MLC)和三孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)。结果:全部病例均顺利完成手术,两组患者均无中转开腹,痊愈出院。结论:在熟练三孔LC的基础上,开展二孔MLC是安全、有效的,减少了患者的创伤,使微创技术有了更进一步的提高。     

二孔法及改良二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术

目的探讨二孔法及改良二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术的临床应用。方法对选择性113例二孔法及改良二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术进行总结。结果113例患者采用该术式顺利完成手术,应用二孔法完成30例,改良二孔法完成83例,手术时间为(32.3±12.5)min;无中转三孔、四孔腹腔镜胆囊切除(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)及开腹胆囊切除术;平均住院时间为(4.7±1.2)d,无近期并发症,全部治愈出院。随访9～12月未见远期并发症,腹部切口愈合疤痕不明显且隐蔽。结论有选择性开展二孔法及改良二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术安全、可行;可最大程度满足患者对手术微创、疤痕小等要求。     

腹腔内单钳打结法在腹腔镜胆囊切除术中的应用

我院自2003年初在腹腔镜胆囊切除术中应用超声刀后,基本免夹使用腔内两钳打结法处理胆囊管或少数胆囊动脉。为了进一步发展微创技术——二孔法免夹腹腔镜胆囊切除术,笔者设计了腔内单钳打结法,并更进一步实施了一孔法免夹腹腔镜胆囊切除术。该方法同样在三孔法、四孔法中有其优越性,自2008年7月初至2009年4月下旬采用此法实施LC术284例,现报告如下。     

缝吊暴露二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术93例

目的: 设计寻求更具微创意义的腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)新术式.方法: 于2003年8月至2005年2月,采用丝线缝吊牵拉胆囊,代替钳夹牵拉胆囊暴露术野的方法,无选择性地对93例病人以二孔法行腹腔镜胆囊切除术.结果: 手术成功90例,2例转四孔LC,1例转开腹完成手术,无更多的并发症出现.结论: 以丝线缝吊牵拉胆囊暴露术野行二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术,技术简便、可行、实用.暴露效果介于四孔法LC和三孔法LC之间,主刀手术难度增加不是太大,操作时间延长不多,手术成功率接近四孔法LC,手术适应证与四孔法LC基本相同.手术更微创,并且给患者带来了十分优良的外表视觉观感.     

三孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术应用体会

随着腹腔镜胆囊切除术（laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC）的广泛应用以及微创外科理念的发展,多种改良式腹腔镜胆囊切除术由之而生,如：四孔法免钛夹腹腔镜胆囊切除术、交换器械法、单换器械法、悬吊式三孔法等等。我院在免钛夹腹腔镜胆囊切除术、改良式腹腔镜胆囊切除术的基础上．于2005年6月～2006年12月开展三孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术120例,取得良好效果,现分析如下。     

剑突下微切口二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术的临床应用体会

目的 探讨剑突下3 mm鞘管（微切口）二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术的应用体会。方法 回顾性分析2018年6月至2019年5月在宁夏医科大学附属吴忠市人民医院和宁夏回族自治区人民医院实施剑突下微切口（4 mm）,配合右侧腋前线肋缘下针式组合式显露器进行二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术的36例患者临床资料。结果 36例中除1例改为三孔法外,其余35例均顺利完成手术,成功率97.2%。手术时间（38.2±10.5）min,术后平均住院时间2.3 d,所有患者术后均无出血、胆漏、胆道损伤等并发症的发生。总体住院费用低于三孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术。结论 剑突下微切口二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术,术中显露满意,操作方便易学,术后外观几乎等同于单孔腹腔镜效果,此术式符合微创美观、操作简便、经济实用、安全可靠的原则,值得进一步推广。     

腹腔镜胰腺外科手术进展及热点问题探讨

二十世纪八十年代,随着第1例腹腔镜胆囊切除术的成功．腹腔镜微创技术很快引起了外科医师的极大兴趣并得以广泛开展。腹腔镜微创技术与传统手术相比,具有创伤小、恢复快、切口美观等优点,很多传统术式被微创手术所替代。1992年美国外科协会规定胆囊切除的金标准术式是腹腔镜胆囊切除术。     

二孔法针式腹腔镜胆囊切除术的临床应用

目的 探讨针式腹腔镜器械在二孔法腹腔镜中的应用.方法 2007年6月-12月采用针式腹腔镜器械完成二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术50例.结果 50例手术均顺利完成,其中1例改三孔法手术,2例针式器械改普通5 mm器械,无手术并发症.结论 针式腹腔镜器械结合二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术同样安全可靠,而且创伤更小.     

腹腔镜下胆囊切除术120例

随着微创技术的不断发展，腹腔镜手术已广泛应用于临床并取得较好疗效[1]。腹腔镜下胆囊切除手术是临床治疗胆道疾病的重要手法之一，随着腹腔镜手术的临床应用．三孔腹腔镜逐渐替代传统四孔法拉[2]，选取我院120例患者行对比研究，探讨三孔法腹腔镜下胆囊切除术治疗胆道疾病的方法及临床效果．总结报道如下。     

隐匿性小切口二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术

目的探讨采用自行设计的二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术的可行性。方法回顾性分析浙江省台州医院2018年1月至2018年5月采用自行设计的二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术完成手术的38例临床资料。结果38例患者均成功完成二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术,术后切口疼痛轻,无腹腔出血、切口感染、胆道损伤等并发症。患者切口疤痕小,隐匿。结论自行设计的二孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术创伤小、切口隐匿、美容效果好,且操作相对简单易学,可在慢性胆囊炎且胆囊炎症轻的胆囊良性病变患者中应用推广。     

腹腔镜胆总管取石和内镜乳头切开取石治疗胆总管结石的回顾性分析

目的:分析两种微创手术方式:腹腔镜胆囊切除(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)结合胆总管取石术(laparoscopic common bile duct extraction,LCBDE)和内镜下乳头括约肌切开(endoscopic sphincterotomy,EST)取石联合LC治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石病人的疗效和安全性。方法:回顾近4年余胆囊结石合并胆总管结石病人的临床资料,其中LC+LCBDE组40例,EST+LC组40例。比较两组手术成功率、结石清除率以及术后并发症发生率等指标。结果:LC+LCBDE组与EST+LC组手术成功率(97.5%比95.0%)、结石清除率(90.0%比92.5%)、术后近期并发症发生率(7.5%比5.0%)比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组都无围手术期死亡。LC+LCBDE组住院费用与住院时间低于EST+LC组(P<0.001)。LC+LCBDE组未发生远期并发症、无结石复发、EST+LC组2例结石复发和4例发生远期并发症(3例胆道感染、1例复发性胰腺炎)(15.0%)。结论:本研究显示,LC+LCBDE与EST+LC治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的疗效及安全性相似。LC+LCBDE治疗既保留了Oddi括约肌的功能,避免EST相关的潜在风险;同时缩短住院时间,降低住院费用。     

LC＋LCBDE与ERCP／EST＋LC治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的梗阻性黄疸患者的临床对照研究

目的探讨腹腔镜胆囊切除术（LC）联合腹腔镜胆总管探查取石术（LCBDE）与内镜下逆行胰胆管造影（ERCP）及乳头括约肌切开取石术（EST）联合LC治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的梗阻性黄疸患者的疗效及安全性。方法回顾性分析我院2011年1月至2012年6月期间分别采用LC＋LCBDE（LC＋LCBDE组,n-48）及ERCP／EST＋LC（ERCP／EST＋LC组,n=76）治疗的胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的梗阻性黄疸患者的临床资料,比较分析2组患者的临床治疗情况。结果①2组患者的一般临床资料如年龄、性别、术前总胆红素和丙氨酸转氨酶、结石数量、最大结石直径及胆总管内径比较,差异均无统计学意义∽〉0．05）,具有可比性。②2组均无同手术期死亡病例。2组患者的取石成功率、中转开腹率及并发症发生率比较差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）,但是LC＋LCBDE组手术时间及术后住院时间均明显短于ERCP／EST＋LC组P〈0．05）,手术费用及住院费用也少于ERCP／EST＋LC组P〈0．05）。结论ERCP／EST＋LC与LC＋LCBDE治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的梗阻性黄疸患者同样安全、有效。但LC＋LCBDE成本效益更高,有利于患者恢复,尤其是当胆总管直径大于1．0cm或多发结石,LC＋LCBDE是最佳选择。总之,应根据患者实际病情及医院条件,个体化选择最适合患者的微创治疗方式。     

Percutaneous gallbladder drainage for delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with acute cholecystitis

BACKGROUND: Many studies have concluded that delayed or interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in patients with acute cholecystitis (AC) demonstrated higher conversion rates and complication rates compared with early LC. However, if the acutely inflamed gallbladder is decompressed by emergent percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PGBD), it may decrease the technical difficulty of LC allowing successful delayed LC when the patient is in better condition. The purpose of this retrospective study was to assess the outcomes of delayed LC following PGBD in patients with AC. METHODS: A total of 72 LC for AC were divided into PGBD (n = 27) and non-PGBD groups (n = 45). The PGBD group had delayed LC (after 72 hours of admission). Thirty-two non-PGBD patients had early LC (within 72 hours of admission) and 13 non-PGBD had delayed LC. Outcome of delayed LC for the PGBD group was assessed by LC time, conversion rate, morbidity rate, and hospital stay, and compared with that of the non-PGBD group. RESULTS: Compared with early and delayed LC of the non-PGBD group, the PGBD group showed longer LC time (median 110 minutes versus 87.5 minutes versus 85 minutes, P <0. 05), a little lower conversion rate (15% versus 25% versus 23%), similar morbidity rate (15% versus 9% versus 15%), and prolonged hospital stay (13 days versus 7 days versus 10 days). CONCLUSIONS: PGBD did not significantly improve the outcome of LC for AC as assessed by conversion and morbidity rate and hospital stay compared with no PGBD. Thus, we can conclude that although PGBD is a safe and effective emergency procedure for AC, it should be limited to higher risk groups such as elderly or critically ill patients and to acalculous cholecystitis.     

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is less expensive than open cholecystectomy.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is emerging as the most attractive alternative to open cholecystectomy (OC) ever offered to patients. It combines a rapid recovery time with definitive therapy for their affliction. In addition to its greater acceptance by patients, LC has the potential to be more economical than OC because of the markedly shorter hospital stay required by most patients who have undergone LC. In this article we compare the hospital charges for patients undergoing LC with a matched group of patients undergoing OC. The hospital charge was $4,070 +/- 297 (mean +/- SEM) for patients undergoing LC and $5,017 +/- 497 for patients undergoing OC. This difference arises from the mean cost of in-patient care, which was $353 +/- 40 for LC patients and $1,335 +/- 138 for OC patients. LC appeared to be a bargain, both economically and physiologically.     

腹腔镜老年胆囊切除术联合胆总管探查取石术98例分析

目的探讨腹腔镜下胆总管探查取石术(LCBDE)联合胆囊切除术(LC)对老年胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床效果,为此类疾病的临床治疗提供新的参考。 方法采用前瞻性研究的方法对2012年1月至2016年12月收治的老年胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者98例进行研究,随机分为LCBDE＋LC组49例和ERCP/EST＋LC组49例;LCBDE＋LC组给予LCBDE＋LC手术治疗,ERCP/EST＋LC组患者采取内镜逆行胆管造影/内镜下括约肌切开取石术(ERCP/EST)联合LC手术治疗。采用SPSS 21.0进行统计分析,手术成功率、结石残存率、并发症发生率等组间比较卡方检验分析;术中术后的各项指标的计量资料采用均数±标准差表示,组间比较采用t检验;P<0.05差异有统计学意义。 结果LCBDE＋LC与ERCP/EST＋LC组比较：手术成功率、复查后结石残留率组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),提示两种手术方法效果相当。LCBDE＋LC组术中术后各项指标显著优于ERCP/EST＋LC组(P<0.05);术后并发症发生率低于ERCP/EST＋LC组,提示LCBDE＋LC组手术安全性高于对照组患者(P<0.05)。 结论采用LCBDE＋LC与ERCP/EST＋LC治疗老年胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床疗效相当,但LCBDE＋LC手术方法的安全性更好,手术时间短、出血量少且手术费用低,可作为老年胆囊结石合并胆总管结石临床治疗的首选方法之一。     

Current management of common bile duct stones: is there a role for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography as a single-stage procedure?

BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) have revolutionized the management of secondary common bile duct (CBD) stones, the use of these modalities as a single-stage procedure remains controversial. The aim of this study is to determine whether LC and intraoperative ERCP as a single procedure has any advantages to LC and either preoperative or postoperative therapeutic ERCP performed in 2 stages. METHODS: A retrospective 5-year review involved all patients undergoing both LC and ERCP for management of CBD stones from January 1997 to December 2001. Patients were categorized into 3 groups: (1) preoperative ERCP, followed by LC (ERCP then LC); (2) LC, followed by postoperative ERCP (LC then ERCP); and (3) LC with intraoperative ERCP as a single procedure (LC/ERCP). RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients were treated for secondary CBD stones. Forty-three patients underwent ERCP then LC, 10 underwent LC then ERCP, and 14 patients underwent LC/ERCP. There were no differences among the groups in terms of patient demographics or overall complication rates. CBD access and stone clearance was achieved in all 67 (100%) patients, with 1 mild ERCP-related complication in the ERCP-then-LC group. Overall complication rates, hospital length of stay, and total hospital charges were not statistically different among the 3 groups. CONCLUSION: Single-stage LC/ERCP provides efficacious therapy for CBD stones and may be beneficial in select patients who may not tolerate a second anesthetic procedure.     

急性胆囊炎腹腔镜切除的手术技巧

目的探讨腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗急性胆囊炎的手术技巧。方法应用腹腔镜为40例急性胆囊炎患实施胆囊切除术治疗。结果40例均顺利在腹腔镜下完成手术。胆总管轻微损伤1例，经镜下缝合，放置引流后治愈。无中转开腹病例，无其它并发症，所有病人均痊愈出院。结论行腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗急性胆囊炎时，应严格掌握基本原则和具备较高手术技巧，可有效预防并发症的发生，提高手术成功率。     

腹腔镜胆囊切除胆道探查取石术与内镜下Oddi括约肌切开取石联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术的疗效比较

目的 比较腹腔镜胆囊切除（laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC）胆道探查取石（laparoscopic common bile duct exploration,LCBDE）与内镜下Oddi括约肌切开(endoscopic sphincterotomy,EST)取石联合LC两种方法治疗继发性胆总管结石的疗效。方法 回顾性分析2008年1月至2009年12月我院收治的采用LC+ LCBDE或EST+ LC治疗的继发性胆总管结石患者的临床资料,对比两种方法的手术成功率、手术时间、术后并发症、残石率、住院时间、住院费用等。统计学处理,计数资料用X2检验,计量资料采用独立样本t检验。结果 共收治继发性胆总管结石患者163例,有87例行LC+ LCBDE,76例行EST +LC。二者相比,LC+ LCBDE手术时间较EST+ LC平均缩短30 min、住院时间缩短3d、术后并发症少、费用低,二者手术成功率、残石率无显著差异。结论 治疗继发性胆总管结石,LC+ LCBDE安全、有效,并发症少,在病情允许情况下,可作为首选方法。     

腹腔镜联合内镜逆行胰胆管造影术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床体会

目的:探讨内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography,ERCP)联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的最佳组合方式。方法:回顾分析2007年1月至2012年11月为203例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者行ERCP+内镜乳头括约肌切开术(endoscopic sphincterotomy,EST)联合LC的临床资料。其中138例先行ERCP+EST取出胆总管结石,再行LC(ERCP+LC组);65例先行LC再行ERCP+EST(LC+ERCP组)。对比分析两组手术成功率、总住院时间及并发症情况。结果:两组均无穿孔、出血及重症胰腺炎等严重并发症发生。ERCP+LC组住院时间短[(7.2±2.1)d vs.(8.1±1.9)d],差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。ERCP+LC组术后胆管残余结石4例,发生急性轻型胰腺炎1例、胆管炎1例,并发症发生率为4.3%;低于LC+ERCP组的12.3%(P<0.05)。结论:对于胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的患者,先行ERCP+EST取石,再行LC,手术并发症较少,住院时间短,是较理想的组合方式。     

胆囊结石伴急性胆源性胰腺炎的腹腔镜胆囊切除术

目的探讨胆囊结石伴急性胆源性胰腺炎(acute biliary pancreatitis,ABP)实施腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopiccholecystectomy,LC)的可行性及手术时机。方法1999年1月~2007年8月,行LC治疗72例胆囊结石伴ABP。56例经非手术治疗胰腺炎缓解后早期(≤2周)行LC,8例延期(1~3个月)行LC,8例非手术治疗效果不佳而急诊行LC。结果72例LC均获成功。手术时间30~135min,平均63min。术中出血量20~230ml,平均50ml。术中胆道造影5例,均成功。造影发现4例胆总管下段结石,术后行逆行性胰胆管造影(endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography,ERCP)联合内镜下十二指肠括约肌切开术(endoscopic sphincterotomy,EST)取石成功。中转开腹1例,无围手术期死亡,无术后出血及胆漏并发症。2例术后4d急性胰腺炎复发,保守治愈。72例随访2个月~8年,平均19个月,无胰腺炎、胆总管结石复发。结论对胆囊结石伴急性胆源性胰腺炎患者,如能慎重选择病例,做好必要的围手术处理,早期实...