Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A report of 409 consecutive cases and its future outlook

A retrospective study was conducted on 409 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy at Teikyo University Hospital between May, 1990 and October, 1992. The operation had to be converted to an open cholecystectomy in ten of these patients because of uncontrollable bleeding from the cystic artery in one, venous bleeding due to portal hypertension in one, extensive adhesions of the omentum and the duodenum to the gallbladder in two, extensive adhesions around the gallbladder in four, and extensive adhesions between the gallbladder and the common bile duct (CBD) in two. The time taken to complete the procedure ranged from 30 to 235 min, the average time being 81 min, and the postoperative hopital stay ranged from 3 to 56 days, the average stay being 6.5 days. Eleven patients developed complications intra- or postoperatively: bile duct injury which became manifest after the operation and required laparotomy in three patients; injury to the right hemidiaphragm resulting in a right pneumothorax in one; periumbilical subcutaneous emphysema in one; mild bile leaks which resolved in a few days in two; and a severe bile leak which resolved after 6 days in one. The indications for laparoscopic cholecystectomy have widened with experience and now, CBD stones and a history of previous gastrectomy are no longer contraindications for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Thus, it seems that laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be performed as safely as a standard cholecystectomy, provided the patients are selected properly and appropriate caution is exercised.     

腹腔镜胆囊切除联合手术117例临床报告

目的探讨腹腔镜联合手术的可行性及安全性。方法回顾分析1992年3月至2006年12月间117例腹腔镜联合手术的临床资料;男性39例,女性78例,年龄为25~74岁,其中行腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC) 腹腔镜阑尾切除术(laparascopic appendectomy,LA)46例;LC 肝囊肿去顶减压术15例;LC 肾囊肿去顶减压术6例;LC 肝、肾囊肿去顶减压术3例;LC 腹腔镜脾切除、门奇静脉联合断流术7例;LC 腹腔镜胃肠间质瘤切除术6例;LC 腹股沟疝修补术3例;LC 结直肠癌根治术8例;LC 粘连松解术6例;LC 子宫肌瘤剔除术6例;LC 卵巢囊肿剥除术10例;LC 肾脏错构瘤切除术1例。结果手术均顺利完成,中转开腹1例,胆漏1例,无感染、出血和胆道损伤等并发症;术后住院日平均为5.7 d。结论只要严格掌握各自疾病的手术治疗原则及联合手术的适应证,对两种或两种以上腹部病变的腹腔镜联合处理是安全有效的,具有创伤小、痛苦少、恢复快、灵活方便和多病联治的优点。     

LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY

A consecutive series of 220 laparoscopic cholecystectomies (June 1990 to May 1991) is presented. These were the author's initial experience of the technique. Procedures were elective (205) and acute (15). including 3 gangrenous cholecystitis and 4 empyema. There were 166 females and 34 males, 12–75 years, weighing 44–115 kg. Forty-eight patients had prior abdominal surgery. Two hundred and eleven patients had successful laparoscopic cholecystectomies, 6 open cholecystectomies and 3 mini laparotomies to remove spilt stones. None of the last 120 cases were opened. Operating time ranged from 20min to 3h 20min. There were 4 serious complications: 2 bile leaks from the gall-bladder bed and 2 jejunal injuries (Veres needle and 5 mm trocar). Sixty-one patients were discharged the next day, 29 on day 2, 5 on day 3, 4 on day 4, 1 on day 5, I on day 22 and I on day 27. At two weeks follow-up all but 2 patients had fully recovered.     

LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY INITIAL EXPERIENCE

Twenty-five consecutive patients underwent percutaneous laparoscopic cholecystectomy (PCC). The gallbladder was removed successfully in 18 patients. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 1.4 days and patients returned to normal activity at a mean 8 days after operation. Postoperative pain was minimal. Formal laparotomy was performed in 7 patients due to: bleeding (3 patients), stone spillage (3 patients) and exploration of the common bile duct (1 patient). Complications were reduced with experience and strict adherence to the described operative technique. With obvious advantages for the patient, hospitals and the community an increased demand for PCC is inevitable. However, its role in the management of cholelithiasis and overall safety have yet to be determined. There is a significant learning curve and proper training is necessary. The widespread introduction of PCC has immediate implications for surgical training.     

Timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for subacute calculous cholecystitis: early or interval--a prospective study

Background/Purpose The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for subacute cholecystitis and to compare it with interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods The study was performed in 74 patients who had been diagnosed with subacute cholecystitis between January 2000 and June 2005. The patients were divided into two groups. The early laparoscopic cholecystectomy group was composed of 31 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy 24 h after admission to the hospital. The interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy group was composed of 43 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy 8–12 weeks after medical treatment. Results There was no significant difference between the conversion rate, intraoperative bleeding, need for intraoperative cholangiography, minor bile duct injury, and postoperative complications in the two groups. Eleven patients in the interval group underwent urgent laparoscopic cholecystectomy or additional procedures because of recurrent cholecystitis, choledocholithiasis, or biliary pancreatitis. The early group had a significantly shorter total hospital stay (P = 0.031), lower cost of treatment (P = 0.042), and less difficulty with Calot's triangle dissection (P = 0.008). Conclusions Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be done without hesitation in patients with subacute cholecystitis, in the light of obstacles observed in the interval group, such as dissection difficulty, lack of success in “cooling down”, and additional problems such as choledocholithiasis and biliary pancreatitis.     

���︹ǻ�������г�����״��չ��

腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)具有创伤轻、对机体内环境影响小、术后疼痛轻、恢复正常活动快、外形美观等特点,已成为治疗胆囊良性病变的“金标准”[1]。随着LC技术的日益成熟,LC的适用范围也在不断扩展[2-3]。与此同时,不少综合性大医院正面临着床位周转困难和降低医疗费用的双重压力。根据LC的技术特点,国外一些医疗中心从20世纪90年代初期开始探索门诊腹腔镜胆囊切除术(out-patient laparoscopic cholecystec-tomy,OPLC)的可行性和安全性,取得了良好的效果[4]。90年代末,Kehlet等提出加速康复外科治疗(fast …     

困难腹腔镜胆囊切除应对策略

困难胆囊包括Mirrizi综合征、胆囊十二指肠内瘘、萎缩性胆囊炎、门静脉高压症胆囊等。困难腹腔镜胆囊切除是导致术中胆管与血管损伤的主要原因,确保手术安全是实施困难腹腔镜胆囊切除的重要原则。为此,术前应完善磁共振胰胆管造影（MRCP）与增强CT检查,排除胆道血管变异,根据局部炎症与术者经验选择适宜的手术时机。术中应选择适宜的解剖路径与解剖技巧,离断胆囊动脉与胆囊管均应在清晰解剖Calot三角的前提下。术后应注意创面的检查与引流,及时发现并处理各种并发症如胆管损伤、血管损伤、胆漏、胆囊管残余结石、胆囊床积液、胃肠道损伤等。     

Two-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background: Two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been reported to be safe and feasible. However, whether it offers any additional advantages remains controversial. This study reports a randomized trial that compared the clinical outcomes of two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods: One hundred and twenty consecutive patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized to receive either the two-port or the four-port technique. All patients were blinded to the type of operation they underwent. Four surgical tapes were applied to standard four-port sites in both groups at the end of the operation. All dressings were kept intact until the first follow-up 1 week after surgery. Postoperative pain at the four sites was assessed on the first day after surgery using a 10-cm unscaled visual analog scale (VAS). Other outcome measures included analgesia requirements, length and difficulty of the operation, postoperative stay, and patient satisfaction score on surgery and scars. Results: Demographic data were comparable for both groups. Patients in the two-port group had shorter mean operative time (54.6 ± 24.7 min vs 66.9 ± 33.1 min for the four-post group; p = 0.03) and less pain at individual subcostal port sites [mean score using 10-cm unscaled VAS: 1.5 vs 2.8 (p = 0.01) at the midsubcostal port site and 1.3 vs 2.3 (p = 0.02) at the lateral subcostal port site]. Overall pain score, analgesia requirements, hospital stay, and patient satisfaction score on surgery and scars were similar between the two groups. Conclusion: Two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy resulted in less individual port-site pain and similar clinical outcomes but fewer surgical scars compared to four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Thus, it can be recommended as a routine procedure in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Paper presented at the Fifth World Congress of the International Hepato-pancreato-biliary Association, Tokyo, Japan, April 2002     

腹腔镜胆囊切除术中转开腹25例临床分析

目的总结腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy，LC)中转开腹的原因并探讨其防治措施。方法1998年7月-2004年8月共行462例LC，中转开腹21例(14．5％)，回顾性分析其临床特点及治疗效果。结果术中发现右肝管被夹闭1例，胆漏3例，术野不清出血明显17例，予中转开腹进一步处理，均痊愈出院。结论熟悉各种解剖变异、规范精细操作、适时中转开腹是预防LC并发症的关键；胆囊周围粘连严重、解剖困难、出血不易控制、损伤周围脏器、胆囊癌变等情况是中转开腹手术的适应证。