内镜腹腔镜联合治疗胆囊结石并胆总管结石

胆囊结石并继发或原发胆总管结石的传统治疗方法是开腹切除胆囊、胆总管切开取石及T管引流。近年来,随着内镜和腹腔镜技术的日益进步和完善,内镜下十二指肠乳头括约肌切开术(EST)和腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)正逐步替代开腹手术。我科自1999年10月到2001年3月共治疗该类疾病30例,效果良好,现报告如下。 1.一般资料:本组30例患者,男11例,女19例,年龄28～75岁,平均51.5岁。均经2次以上B超诊断为胆囊结石     

两种不同术式治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石临床疗效对比分析

目的对比传统开腹胆总管切开取石+胆囊切除术与经十二指肠镜逆行胰胆管造影(endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography,ERCP)+内镜乳头括约肌切开取石术(endoscopic sphincterotomy,EST)+腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2016-09～2017-09在该院接受治疗的88例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者的基本资料。将上述患者分为开腹组(开腹胆总管切开取石+胆囊切除术,44例)和ERCP+EST+LC组(44例)。比较两组患者的一般临床资料、手术时间、住院时间、住院费用、术前术后肝功能及术后并发症情况。结果两组术前谷丙转氨酶(ALT)、谷草转氨酶(AST)方面比较差异无统计学意义(P 0. 05),而在手术时间、住院时间、住院费用、术后ALT、术后AST、术后总并发症发生率方面比较差异有统计学意义(P 0. 05)。结论 ERCP+EST+LC组治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石总体优于传统开腹胆总管切开取石+胆囊切除术,且手术时间及住院时间短,住院费用少,术后肝功能损伤小,安全性较高,值得推广。     

内镜下Oddi括约肌切开术联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术序贯治疗老年胆总管结石并胆囊结石

目的探讨内镜下Oddi括约肌切开术（endoscopic sphincterotomy,EST）联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术（laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC）序贯治疗老年胆总管结石并胆囊结石的方法和价值。方法胆总管结石并胆囊结石的35例老年病人均经B超或CT、磁共振胰胆管成像术（MRCP）检查确诊后,先行EST取石,再择期行LC。结果33例病人完成EST联合LC的序贯治疗,2例EST取石后因再次出现胆总管结石,其中1例行急诊胆总管切开取石术和剖腹胆囊切除术,1例内镜下取石后行剖腹胆囊切除术。结论EST联合应用LC序贯治疗老年胆总管结石合并胆囊结石是一种安全有效的治疗方法。     

EST与LC联合治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石疗效观察

目的观察十二指肠镜下十二指肠乳头括约肌切开术（EST）联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术（LC）治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的疗效。方法将90例胆囊结石合并胆管结石患者随机分为治疗组和对照组,各45例。治疗组行EST联合LC,对照组行传统开腹胆管探查T管引流术。结果治疗组手术成功率为95.6%,对照组为91.1%（P〉0.05）;治疗组术后并发症发生率为8.9%,显著低于对照组的20.0%（P〈0.05）,治疗组术后胃肠道功能恢复时间和平均住院时间较对照组显著缩短（P〈0.05）。结论 EST与LC联合治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石安全、有效。     

十二指肠乳头球囊扩张联合腹腔镜胆囊切除治疗胆管合并胆囊结石37例

胆总管结石合并胆囊结石采用经内镜乳头括约肌切开(EST)取石联合腹腔镜胆囊切除(LC)是目前常用的治疗方法,但对年龄轻的患者,须尽量保持乳头括约肌的完整性,而扁平样小乳头、憩室内乳头及乳头周围巨大憩室行EST发生穿孔的危险较大.我院对2008年1月至2011年12月收治的37例胆总管结石合并胆囊结石的患者,进行十二指肠乳头括约肌球囊扩张(EPBD)取石联合腹腔镜胆囊切除(LC),取得令人满意的疗效,现报道如下.     

双镜联合微创手术与开腹手术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的对比研究

目前临床上手术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石有多种方法,常见的有传统的开腹胆囊切除术＋胆总管探查取石术（OCHTD）,经内镜逆行胰胆管造影术（endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography,ERCP）,内镜下乳头括约肌切开取石联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术（endoscopic sphineterotomy con-bined with laparo-seopie eholeeystectomy,EST＋LC）以及腹腔镜胆囊切除、胆总管切开取石术（laparoseopie eholecysteetomy and common bile duct exploration,LC＋LCBDE）。     

LC联合术中ERCP一期治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床分析

目的探讨腹腔镜胆囊切除术（LC）联合术中内镜下逆行胆胰管造影（ERCP）及乳头切开（EST）取石一期治疗胆囊结石合并肝外胆管结石的可行性和安全性。方法回顾分析应用LC联合术中ERCP一期治疗胆囊结石合并肝外胆管结石36例的临床资料,分析原发病、手术方式、术后康复、住院时间及并发症。结果术前明确胆总管结石31例中10例先行术中ERCP取石,取石成功后再行LC;余21例和5例术前怀疑胆总管结石、术中经胆囊管胆道造影（TCC）证实胆总管结石者先行LC,继而行ERCP取石。LC手术均获成功,ERCP取石成功率为97.22%。术后5例出现一过性血淀粉酶升高,无明显出血、胆漏等并发症,术后住院平均为4 d。结论 LC联合术中ERCP一期治疗胆囊结石合并肝外胆管结石安全、有效,可避免不必要的ERCP及因术后ERCP失败而致患者再次手术。     

高龄患者胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的微创治疗

目的探讨高龄患者胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的改良微创手术治疗的安全性及可行性。 方法回顾性分析南京中医药大学附属昆山市中医院自2012年1月至2017年12月采用内镜引导下逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)：内镜下十二指肠乳头括约肌切开术(EST)小切开＋内镜乳头气囊扩张术(EPBD)联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)对100例70岁以上胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者进行治疗。 结果本组100例患者中,1例十二指肠乳头括约肌切开时出血,给予1：10 000肾上腺素黏膜下注射后出血停止、3例出现胰腺炎、2例发生胆管炎,均经内科保守治疗后好转。全组LC术无中转开腹、无死亡病例,LC术后住院时间4～10 d,平均(5.3±2.8)d,随访2～24个月,平均(7.5±5.1)个月,患者无腹痛、黄疸及发热等症状,复查超声未见胆管结石复发。 结论改良ERCP＋(EST＋EPBD)联合LC术治疗高龄患者胆囊结石合并胆总管结石操作手术成功率高、并发症少、术后恢复快,是一种有效且安全可靠的微创治疗术式,值得推广。     

腹腔镜联合胆道镜经胆囊管治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床分析

目的探讨应用腹腔镜联合胆道镜经胆囊管行胆道探查治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床效果。方法对2014年1月-2015年12月陕西省核工业二一五医院收治的52例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者行腹腔镜联合胆道镜经胆囊管胆道探查取石术,观察其临床效果。结果 52例患者中40例顺利完成手术,手术成功率为76.92%。7例改为腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石、T管引流术,5例中转开腹行胆总管切开取石、T管引流术,中转开腹率9.62%。43例患者一次取石成功,占82.69%;剩余9例患者行二次取石,其中行经胆囊管胆道探查取石术者8例,行腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石术者1例。所有患者术后留置网膜孔引流管,术后3~10 d拔除,1例行腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石患者术后出现胆漏,经保守治疗后康复。无胆道出血、胆道感染等发生,平均住院时间(8.24±2.52)d,所有患者均得到随访1年,B超及磁共振胰胆管造影检查肝内外未见结石残留,肝功能胆红素指标正常。结论腹腔镜联合胆道镜经胆囊管进行胆道探查取石术具有创伤小、患者恢复快、并发症少、安全等优点,临床应用需严格掌握其适应证。     

胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的现代外科治疗模式

微创化理念的迅速普及, 微创设备的高速发展, 外科医师可以熟练的运用各种微创化器械使患者在短期内迅速康复. 胆总管结石的治疗方式也发生了巨大变化, 由传统的开腹胆总管切开取石、T管引流, 转变为腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石一期缝合或腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石、T管引流, 腹腔镜下经胆囊管胆道镜取石,或胆囊切除, 术前或术后应用十二指肠镜取出胆总管结石. 腹腔镜、十二指肠镜、胆道镜的三镜联合应用将会是今后治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的现代外科治疗模式.     

Successful outcomes of EMR-L with 3D-EUS for rectal carcinoids compared with historical controls

AIM： To assess the results of endoscopic mucosal resection with a ligation device （EMR-L） combined with three dimensional endoscopic ultrasonography （3D- EUS） using an ultrasonic probe for rectal carcinoids. In addition, diagnosis of the depth and size of lesions by EUS was evaluated.
METHODS： Between January 2003 and March 2007, 20 patients underwent EMR-L with 3D-EUS using an ultrasonic probe （group A）. 3D-EUS was combined with EMR-L at the time of injection of sterile physiological saline into the submucosal layer. For comparison, 14 rectal carcinoids that had been treated by EMR-L without 3D-EUS between April 1998 and December 2002 were evaluated as historical controls （group B）. EUS was conducted for all of the patients before treatment to evaluate tumor diameter and depth of invasion. The percentage of complete resection and the vertical resection margin were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS： The depth of invasion upon histopathological examination was in complete agreement with the pre-operative findings by EUS. The tumor diameter determined by EUS approximated that found in the tissue samples. There were no significant differences in the gender, tumor sites or tumor diameters between the two groups. The rate of complete resection for groups A and B was 100% and 71%, respectively （P 〈 0.05）. The vertical resection margin of group A was longer than that of group B.
CONCLUSION： EMR-L is effective as an endoscopic treatment for rectal carcinoids. In combination with 3D-EUS, safe and complete resection is further assured.     

超声内镜对食管静脉曲张结扎术前后侧枝循环变化的临床研究

目的 应用Fujinon SP-701小探头超声内镜观察食管静脉曲张结扎术(EVL)前后曲张静脉及侧枝循环的变化，分析影响疗效的原因。选择合理的治疗方法。方法 对60例单纯食管静脉曲张出血患者依超声检查结果分为3组：Ⅰ组为单纯食管静脉曲张(EV)；Ⅱ组为合并有食管旁静脉(PEV)，但无交通枝(PV)；Ⅲ组合并有食管旁静脉及交通枝。患者EVL术后4、8、12周行超声内镜检查，观察及测量EV、PEV、PV的变化情况，分析影响疗效的原因。结果 Ⅰ组显效率75％，复发率16％，疗效最佳；Ⅲ组显效率0％，复发率100％，疗效最差。Ⅰ组24例中出现PEV者12例；Ⅱ组20例PEV全部增宽，11例出现PV；Ⅲ组全部有PEV增宽、PV增多增宽表现。结论 超声内镜对食管静脉曲张出血治疗方法的选择有指导意义。单纯食管静脉曲张EVL可获得满意疗效，但是伴PEV及PV者不是EVL适应证，建议采用其他方法治疗。     

θ��λ���ٵij����ھ����������

目的提高对胃异位胰腺的诊断及治疗水平。方法2000-2004年对解放军总医院消化科241例胃黏膜下肿物进行超声内镜(EUS)检查,回顾分析胃异位胰腺的图像特征。结果EUS诊断良性间质瘤105例,恶性间质瘤23例,脂肪瘤48例,异位胰腺45例,囊肿20例。异位胰腺EUS图像特点:(1)黏膜下层病变39例,6例与固有肌层无分界;(2)边界清37例;(3)42例为不均匀、形状不规则中强回声,3例为不均匀低回声;(4)32例中心有小的不规则液性回声。内镜电切26例,无出血穿孔等并发症。结论超声内镜对胃异位胰腺的诊断有一定价值,内镜切除是安全有效的治疗方法。     

ERCP结合EPT对胆囊切除术后患者诊治价值的探讨

目的 回顾性研究逆行性胰胆管造影（ERCP）结合乳头肌切开术（EPT）对胆囊切除术后患者的诊治价值。方法 170例胆囊切除术后症状再发或反复发作患者，接受ERCP检查和EPT等治疗，诊断结果与B超作对照。同时动态观察内镜下介入诊治术后临床表现的改变。不良反应及血清淀粉酶的变化及高淀粉酶血症的分布情况。结果 经ERCP结合EPT等术后患者临床症状显著改善；与B超对照ERCP对胆囊切除术后胆总管残余结石的诊断率显著提高（P＜0．001），对胆总管扩张程度的诊断价值显著优于B超（P＜0．05），并能发现许多B超检查不能发现的胆胰病变；术后主要不良反应表现为出血、高淀粉酶血症，ERCP结合EPT等治疗组高淀粉酶的发生率显著高于单纯ERCP操作组（P＜0．01）。经积极地处理后短期内出血控制，血清淀粉酶多在3日内转为正常。结论 对胆囊切除术后患者，ECRP结合EPT不失为一项非常有价值、安全的诊治措施。     

Small sphincterotomy combined with papillary dilation with large balloon permits retrieval of large stones without mechanical lithotripsy

AIM： TO introduce a new method： small endoscopic sphincterotomy （ES） combined with endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation （SES ＋ EPLBD） to treat patients with large biliary stones.
METHODS： Retrieval of large biliary stones was performed in 88 patients. Mean stone size was 14 ± 3 mm and mean number of stones was 2.5 ± 3.5. Firstly, ES with a small incision was performed. Next, endoscopic papillary dilation was performed with a large balloon to slowly match the size of the bile duct. Stones were then retrieved from the biliary duct with a balloon and a basket.
RESULTS： Stone retrieval was successful in all cases except one cystic duct stone case without the need to crush large stones. Mean procedure time was 30 ± 5 min. Dilating the papillary orifice with a large balloon made it possible to remove large stones smoothly without crushing them. After dilation with the large balloon, there were some instances of oozing, but no perforations. One instance of post-procedural pancreatitis （1%） occurred.
CONCLUSION： SES ＋ EPLBD was effective for the retrieval of large biliary stones without the use of mechanical lithotripsy.     

Endoscopic ultrasound‐guided pelvic abscess drainage (with video)

Pelvic abscesses present a serious and challenging management problem. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)‐guided drainage provides a safe and effective minimally invasive treatment option. The likelihood of a successful outcome is dependent on appropriate patient selection, drainage technique and postoperative management. This review outlines the evidence behind and procedural steps required for EUS‐guided pelvic abscess drainage.     

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary intervention in patients with surgically altered anatomy

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound guided biliary drainage(EUS-BD) in patients with surgically altered anatomies.METHODS: We performed a search of the MEDLINE database for studies published between 2001 to July2014 reporting on EUS-BD in patients with surgically altered anatomy using the terms "EUS drainage" and "altered anatomy". All relevant articles were accessed in full text. A manual search of the reference lists of relevant retrieved articles was also performed. Only fulltext English papers were included. Data regarding age, gender, diagnosis, method of EUS-BD and intervention, type of altered anatomy, technical success, clinical success, and complications were extracted and collected. Anatomic alterations were categorized as: group 1, Billroth Ⅰ; group 2, Billroth Ⅱ; group 4, Rouxen-Y with gastric bypass; and group 3, all other types. RESULTS: Twenty three articles identified in the literature search, three reports were from the same group with different numbers of cases. In total, 101 cases of EUS-BD in patients with altered anatomy were identified. Twenty-seven cases had no information and were excluded. Seventy four cases were included for analysis. Data of EUS-BD in patients categorized as group 1, 2 and 4 were limited with 2, 3 and 6 cases with EUS-BD done respectively. Thirty four cases with EUS-BD were reported in group 3. The pooled technical success, clinical success, and complication rates of all reports with available data were 89.18%, 91.07% and 17.5%, respectively. The results are similar to the reported outcomes of EUS-BD in general, however, with limited data of EUS-BD in patients with altered anatomy rendered it difficult to draw a firm conclusion. CONCLUSION: EUS-BD may be an option for patients with altered anatomy after a failed endoscopic-retrogradecholangiography in centers with expertise in EUS-BD procedures in a research setting.     

Small sphincterotomy combined with endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation vs sphincterotomy alone for removal of common bile duct stones

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary large diameter balloon dilation (EPLBD) following limited endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) and EST alone for removal of large common bile duct (CBD) stones.METHODS: We retrospectively compared EST + EPLBD (group A, n = 64) with EST alone (group B, n = 89) for the treatment of large or multiple bile duct stones. The success rate of stone clearance, procedure-related complications and incidents, frequency of mechanical lithotripsy use, and recurrent stones were recorded.RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding periampullary diverticula (35.9% vs 34.8%, P > 0.05), pre-cut sphincterotomy (6.3% vs 6.7%, P > 0.05), size (12.1 ± 2.0 mm vs 12.9 ± 2.6 mm, P > 0.05) and number (2.2 ± 1.9 vs 2.4 ± 2.1, P > 0.05) of stones or the diameters of CBD (15.1 ± 3.3 mm vs 15.4 ± 3.6 mm, P > 0.05). The rates of overall stone removal and stone removal in the first session were not significantly different between the two groups [62/64 (96.9%) vs 84/89 (94.4%), P > 0.05; and 58/64 (90.6%) vs 79/89 (88.8%), P > 0.05, respectively]. The rates of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia were not significantly different between the two groups [3/64 (4.7%) vs 4/89 (4.5%), P > 0.05; 7/64 (10.9%) vs 9/89 (10.1%), P > 0.05, respectively]. There were no cases of perforation, acute cholangitis, or cholecystitis in the two groups. The rate of bleeding and the recurrence of CBD stones were significantly lower in group A than in group B [1/64 (1.6%) vs 5/89 (5.6%), P < 0.05; 1/64 (1.6%) vs 6/89 (6.7%), P < 0.05, respectively].CONCLUSION: EST + EPLBD is an effective and safe endoscopic approach for removing large or multiple CBD stones.     

Endoscopic removal of gastric ectopic pancreas: An initial experience with endoscopic submucosal dissection

AIM:To evaluate the therapeutic usefulness and safety of endoscopic resection in patients with gastric ectopic pancreas.METHODS:A total of eight patients with ectopic pancreas were included.All of them underwent endoscopic ultrasonography before endoscopic resection.Endo-scopic resection was performed by two methods:endo-scopic mucosal resection(EMR)by the injection-and-cut technique or endoscopic mucosal dissection(ESD).RESULTS:We planned to perform EMR in all eight cases but EMR was successful in only four cases.In the other four cases,saline spread into surrounding normal tissues and the lesions becameattened,which made it impossible to remove them by EMR.Inthose four cases,we performed ESD and removed the lesions without any complications.CONCLUSION:If conventional EMR is difficult to remove gastric ectopic pancreas,ESD is a feasible alternative method for successful removal.     

Application of endoscopic sphincterotomy in acute pancreatitis with fluid collection： A prospective study

AIM: To elucidate the role of endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in the treatment of acute pancreatitis. METHODS: Ninety patients with acute pancreatitis were randomly divided into two groups: EST group and control group. All the patients underwent pancreatitis routine therapy, additionally the EST group was treated with EST and endoscopic naso-bile drainage (ENBD).The time of disappearance of abdominal symptoms and signs, normalization of amylase, hospitalization and absorption of acute fluid was recorded for all patients. RESULTS: The time of disappearance of abdominal pain, normalization of blood and urine amylase and hospitalization was significantly shorter in EST group than in control group. The ratios of disappearance of fluid in mild acute pancreatitis patients was significantly higher in EST group (51.52%, 84.85%, 90.91%,93.94%) than in the control group (0%, 30.30%, 69.70%, 72.73%, P<0.01 or P<0.05). When the ratios of reduction of fluid in severe acute pancreatitis patients of the EST group were compared (8.33%, 58.33%, 83.33%, 91.67%) with those in the control group (0%, 8.33%, 25% and 41.67%), there were significant differences. CONCLUSION: The effect of EST+ENBD on acute pancreatitis with fluid is rather good.