腹腔镜时代胆总管结石的治疗选择

目的 比较腹腔镜胆囊切除＋胆总管切开探查取石术（LC＋LCBDE）和腹腔镜胆囊切除＋术中内镜下括约肌切开取石术（LC＋EST）的临床效果和住院费用。方法 对48例胆总管结石患者全部行LC，其中A组26例行LCBDE，B组22例行EST。统计手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间、术后并发症和总住院费用。结果 48例患者均未中转开腹，1例接受LCBDE的患者术后胆道残留结石，2例接受EST的患者术后出现一过性高淀粉酶血症，1例术后出现一过性黄疸加重，无其他并发症。两组的手术时间、术中出血量和术后住院时间等无显著性差异；A组住院费用平均为（11640±1171）元，B组患者住院费用平均（16455±2015）元，A组显著低于B组。结论 同EST（B组）相比，LCBDE（A组）是处理胆总管结石更为理想的手术方式。     

胆总管结石的微创处理策略选择

目的:探讨合理选择胆总管结石患者的手术方法及时机。方法:总结我院1992年至2008年3月开展腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)20000余例的经验,尤其是971例患者合并胆总管结石的治疗经验。结果:LC术前行内镜逆行胰胆管造影(endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography,ERCP)发现胆总管结石246例,其中230例顺利完成内镜十二指肠乳头括约肌切开取石术的患者在完成LC后发现胆总管残留结石15例,经过再次内镜手术取出结石。LC术后残留结石73例中68例完成内镜乳头括约肌切开取石术(endoscopic sphincterotomy,EST),5例再次开腹手术。完成491例腹腔镜胆总管切开纤维胆道镜取石,"T"管引流术(laparoscopic choledocholithotomy T-tube drainage,LCTD),出现胆漏11例,经保守治疗治愈。173例经过胆囊管取出胆总管结石,无并发症发生。结论:LCTD是治疗胆总管结石较理想的微创术式,可通过切开胆囊管和部分胆总管,减低手术难度,缩短手术时间。EST手术应在LC前,以免LC后行EST失败,需再次行开腹手术。     

胆总管结石微创治疗

<正>胆总管结石治疗方法以外科治疗为主,传统方法是开腹行胆总管切开探查取石、T管引流术。随着内窥镜、腹腔镜技术的不断发展,现已广泛应用于该病的临床治疗,形成了独特的微创胆道外科技术,使胆总管结石的治疗方案趋向于多样化,包括内镜逆行性胰胆管造影和经内镜十二指肠乳头括     

腹腔镜治疗EST失败的复发性胆总管结石

目的探讨腹腔镜治疗EST失败的复发性胆总管结石的方法与疗效。方法2000年1月~2007年1月对EST失败的25例复发性胆总管结石再次行腹腔镜手术治疗。结果本组除1例因十二指肠前壁损伤而中转开腹手术外,24例LCBD获得成功,痊愈出院,无结石残留、胆漏、胆管狭窄等手术并发症。术后18例(72.0%)获随访,平均25(6~48)个月,均无胆管狭窄及结石复发。19例借助内镜下鼻胆管引流导管Ⅰ期缝合胆总管探查切口,5例胆总管内放置T管引流。结论在熟练掌握腹腔镜技术的基础上,应用腹腔镜治疗EST失败的胆道术后胆总管复发结石是安全、可行的,并体现了微创的优势。     

腹腔镜胆总管切开术与内镜括约肌切开术治疗胆总管结石的比较

目的 探讨腹腔镜与内镜治疗胆总管结石的安全性有效性及适应证。方法 回顾性对比分析1997年7月至2006年6月腹腔镜胆总管切开术及内镜括约肌切开术治疗胆总管结石213例（腹腔镜组122例，内镜组91例）的临床资料。结果 腹腔镜组与内镜组相比手术成功率（96．7％vs．91．2％）及结石清除率（99．2％vs．94．0％）两组相似，近期并发症率（3．4％vs．13．3％，χ^2=6．864，P=0．009）较低；腹腔镜组的平均住院日（z=-2．713，P=0．007）及住院费用（z=-3．156，P=0．002）较高，主要原因是部分病例合并急性梗阻性胆管炎及胆源性胰腺炎预置鼻胆管引流控制感染，以及部分病例行胆总管T管引流等。内镜组发生重症胰腺炎3例（3．6％），其中死亡1例（1．2％）。结论 腹腔镜胆总管切开术保持Oddi括约肌完整，并发症较少、较轻，是治疗胆总管结石较为安全有效的方法。腹腔镜胆总管切开术适用于合并胆囊结石及胆总管扩张，急性梗阻性胆管炎及胆源性胰腺炎得到有效控制，全身情况好、能耐受麻醉手术者；内镜括约肌切开术适用于合并胆总管下段狭窄及结石嵌顿、急性梗阻性胆管炎、胆源性胰腺炎、全身情况差不能耐受麻醉手术的老年患者。     

胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的微创治疗体会

目的:比较腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)联合腹腔镜胆总管探查术(laparoscopic common bile duct exploration,LCBDE)与内镜逆行胰胆管造影(endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography,ERCP)、内镜十二指肠乳头括约肌切开术(endoscopic sphincterotomy,EST)+LC治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床疗效。方法:在2010年1月至2015年11月收治的胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者中选取可耐受腹腔镜手术、ERCP且ASA分级为Ⅰ~Ⅱ级的成年患者作为研究对象,危急重症胆囊炎、急性胆管炎及要求保守治疗的患者未纳入研究。分为两组:LC+LCBDE组与ERCP/EST+LC组,比较分析两组患者术中出血量、手术时间、住院时间、住院费用及术后并发症等指标。结果:共纳入76例患者,30例行LC+LCBDE,其中2例中转开腹;46例行ERCP/EST+LC,其中2例因ERCP取石失败,不予统计。两组患者术中出血量、术后并发症差异无统计学意义,LC+LCBDE组手术时间、住院时间、住院费用优于ERCP/EST+LC组,差异有统计学意义。结论:两种术式治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的疗效相当,但LC+LCBDE可能更加经济实惠。     

胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的微创外科治疗进展

胆石症包括胆囊结石、胆总管结石和肝内胆管结石.胆囊结石合并胆总管结石占胆石症的9.2％ ～ 14.3％,当前临床常用的治疗方法包括传统的开腹胆囊切除及胆总管切开取石+T管引流术(Opencholecystectomy choledocholithotomy and T-tube drainage,OC-OCHTD);经内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)+内镜下括约肌切开取石(EST),二期腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)(即ERCP/EST+LC);同期腹腔镜胆囊切除+胆总管切开取石(LCBDE),这三种术式各有特点.与传统的开腹手术比较,后两者为微创手术治疗方法,体现了微创技术的优势,但手术适应证和操作技术需要不断总结和提高.目前,关于后两种微创方法治疗的文献报道较多,在诸如手术适应证、住院费用、手术时间、治疗风险、并发症、住院时间等方面存在一定争议.比较LCBDE和ERCP/EST+ LC,两者各有优缺点.但是在符合适应证的情况下,LCBDE是一期治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者的首选方法.对患者而言,无论哪种手术方案,创伤小、操作安全、并发症少的方法才是最适合的治疗手段.     

腹腔镜联合内窥镜治疗胆囊胆总管结石

目的 :评价腹腔镜联合内窥镜治疗胆囊胆总管结石的临床疗效。方法 :6 0例胆囊胆总管结石患者经逆行胰胆管造影 (ERCP) ,切开Oddi括约肌 (EST) ,网篮取石和气囊排石后 ,再行腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)。结果 :手术成功率为 80 % ,结石取净率为 10 0 % ,无严重并发症。术后住院 3～ 12d。结论 :腹腔镜联合内窥镜治疗胆囊胆总管结石的临床疗效可靠     

肝外胆管结石的微创治疗

目的:探讨腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)+胆总管探查术(common bile ductexploration,CBDE)与内镜下Oddi括约肌切开术(endoscopic sphincterotomy,EST)联合LC治疗胆囊疾病合并胆总管结石的临床效果及术式选择。方法:2001年4月～2007年12月我院采用微创外科技术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者66例,其中LC+CBDE组48例,EST组18例,比较两组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、术后肠功能恢复时间、术后住院天数、住院总费用、并发症发生率、结石消除率等指标。结果:LC+CBDE组与EST组手术时间、术中出血量、术后肠功能恢复时间、结石消除率等指标差异无显著性(P>0.05),LC+CBDE组住院总天数、住院总费用、并发症发生率明显少于EST组(P<0.01)。结论:两种术式各有其适应证和优缺点,胆总管直径<1.0cm时以行EST取石术为宜,2～5d后再行LC。既往有胆道手术史者亦EST取石为宜。胆总管直径>1.0cm,尤其是并存二级胆管结石者(无胆管狭窄)则宜行LC+CBDE。     

腹腔镜和内窥镜联合治疗复发性胆总管结石

目的 :探讨腹腔镜和内窥镜联合治疗复发性胆总管结石的方法。方法 :回顾总结经内窥镜鼻胆管引流术 (ENBD)配合实施腹腔镜胆总管探查 (LCBDE)、Ⅰ期缝合术 (内衬ENBD导管 )治疗胆道术后复发性胆管结石 2 2例的临床资料。结果 :2 1例手术成功 ,1例中转开腹 ,全部Ⅰ期缝合胆总管探查切口。术后无残石及胆瘘等并发症。手术时间 1 5 7± 31 4min ,术后住院 9 6± 1 2d。随诊 1 7例未见复发。结论 :应用腹腔镜和内窥镜联合治疗胆总管复发结石安全、可行 ,体现了微创治疗的优点 ,但分离粘连及解剖、缝合胆总管较困难 ,治疗初期应适当放宽中转开腹手术的指征     

腹腔镜胆总管切开取石治疗胆总管结石的疗效观察

目前腹腔镜胆囊切除术（laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC）已经成为治疗胆囊炎、胆囊结石的金标准。胆总管结石在我国的发病率较高，占全国胆结石患者的5％～29％，平均18％。我院在成熟开展LC的基础上于2005年9月开展腹腔镜胆总管切开探查取石术（laparoscopic video choledochoibersc opichepatocholangiolitbotomy T—tubedrainage，LCHTD），就其手术经验及疗效分析报道如下。     

Laparoscopic common bile duct stone clearance with flexible choledochoscopy

Background Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is as safe and efficient as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in achieving bile duct clearance from stones. No clear guidelines are available on LCBDE with respect to indications for trans-cystic approach versus choledochotomy, or regarding when to use either flexible choledochoscopy (FCD) or intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) guidance. Methods From January 2001 until November 2006, 113 consecutive patients with common bile duct stones (CBDS) and gallbladder in situ were enrolled in a prospective non-randomized study to undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy with LCBDE on an intention-to-treat basis. Twenty-three patients were aged 80 years or older with severe comorbidity. Preoperative ERCP with attempted stone clearance was performed in 24 patients. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration was attempted for CBDS in the presence of acute cholecystitis in 24 patients. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration was performed via the trans-cystic approach in 83 patients and via choledochotomy in 30 patients. Flexible choledochoscopy was used in 79 patients and IOC guidance in 34 patients. Results No mortality occurred. Postoperative complications were encountered in nine patients. Laparoscopic stone clearance of the bile duct was successful in 91.8% of the patients. Median length of hospital stay (LOS) was two days (range, 0 to 24 days) after trans-cystic LCBDE and six days (range, 2 to 34 days) after stone clearance via choledochotomy (p < 0.0001). Choledochotomy was performed for CBDS measuring an average of 11.5 mm (range, 5 to 30 mm) in diameter while trans-cystic LCBDE was successful for stones measuring an average of 5 mm (range, 2 to 14 mm) (p < 0.0001). Mean duration of surgery was 75 minutes (range, 30 to 180 minutes) when FCD was used, and 107 minutes (range, 45 to 240 minutes) in patients undergoing LCBDE under IOC guidance (p < 0.0001). Conclusion Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and LCBDE with stone extraction can be performed with high efficiency, minimal morbidity and without mortality. A trans-cystic approach is feasible in most patients, whereas choledochotomy should be restricted to large bile duct stones that cannot be extracted through the cystic duct. The use of flexible choledochoscopy is preferable to IOC guidance.     

腹腔镜联合胆道镜治疗胆囊结石并胆总管结石

目的:探讨分析腹腔镜联合胆道镜治疗胆囊结石并胆总管结石的方法。方法:我院2008年3月至2009年12月收治26例胆囊结石并胆总管结石患者,腹腔镜胆囊切除术中切开胆囊管或胆总管,行纤维胆道镜胆总管取石术。结果:26例患者均按常规行腹腔镜胆囊切除术,12例行胆囊管切开取石术,胆总管未放置T管;14例行胆总管切开取石术,其中8例未放置T管,行一期缝合,6例胆总管内放置T管,术后6~8周行纤维胆道镜检查,2例发现残余结石,并取净,4例未发现胆总管残余结石,再次行胆道造影后未发现结石,拔除T管。所有病例均无并发症发生。结论:腹腔镜胆囊切除联合纤维胆道镜取石术治疗胆囊结石并胆总管结石,患者创伤小,康复快,安全有效。术中不能取净胆总管结石者,术后可通过T管窦道行纤维胆道镜取石。     

MRCP在微创技术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石中的应用

目的评价MRCP在内窥镜联合腹腔镜治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石中的应用价值及其微创方式的选择。方法对B型超声检查未发现胆总管结石,但临床高度怀疑的65例胆囊结石病人行MRCP检查,确认胆总管有结石者行EST治疗,术后3~5d再行LC术;如未发现结石则可先行LC术,再根据术后的随访情况决定是否进一步行ERCP+EST。结果经MRCP检查发现胆总管结石13例,均成功行EST+LC术。未发现结石的52例仅行LC术。其中,除2例术后反复出现胆道感染、黄疸,经ERCP证实胆总管残留结石行EST取石外,其余病例术后随访1月~2年均未发现异常。结论根据MRCP检查结果选择不同的微创方式治疗可疑伴有胆总管结石的胆囊结石病人是安全可行的,可使胆总管无结石的可疑病人避免有创ERCP检查所带来的痛苦,值得推广。     

腹腔镜下胆总管切开探查在胆管结石中的应用

目的 :总结腹腔镜下胆总管切开探查取石术的临床应用经验 ,探讨其手术方法 ,术中注意事项及临床应用的优缺点。方法 :腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石 ,T管引流或一期缝合。结果 :2 3例胆总管结石手术2 1例成功 ,2例中转开腹。结论 :腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石术应掌握适应证 ,才能使创伤减小 ,康复快且安全。     

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

Background: Herein I describe my >12-year experience with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Methods: From 21 September 1989 through 31 December 2001, 3,580 patients presented with symptomatic biliary tract disease. Laparoscopic cholecystecomy (LC) was attempted in 3,544 of them (99.1%) and completed in 3,527 (99.5%). Laparoscopic cholangiograms (IOC) were performed in 3,417 patients (96.4%); in 344 cases (9.7%), the IOC was abnormal. Forty-nine patients (1.4%) underwent preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and 33 patients (0.9%) underwent postoperative ERCP. LCBDE was attempted in 326 cases and completed in 321 (98.5%). It was successful in clearing the duct in 317 of the 344 patients with abnormal cholangiograms (92.2%). Results: The mean operating time for all patients undergoing LC with or without cholangiograms or LCBDE or other additional surgery was 56.9 min. Mean length of stay was 22.1 h. The mean operating time for LC only patients (n = 2530)—that is, those not undergoing LCBDE or any other additional procedure—was 47.6 min; their mean postoperative length of stay was 17.2 h. Ductal exploration was performed via the cystic duct in 269 patients, (82.5%) and through a choledochotomy in 57 patients (17.5%). T-tubes were used in patients in whom there was concern for possible retained debris or stones, distal spasm, pancreatitis, or general poor tissue quality secondary to malnutrition or infection. In cases where choledochotomy was used, a T-tube was placed in 38 patients (67%), and primary closure without a T-tube was done in 19 (33%). There were no complications in the group of patients who underwent choledochotomy and primary ductal closure without T-tube placement or in the group in whom T-tubes were placed. Conclusions: Common bile duct (CBD) stones still occur in 10% of patients. These stones are identified by IOC. IOC can be performed in >96.4% of cases of LC. LCBDE was successful in clearing these stones in 97.2% of patients in whom it was attempted and in 92.2% of all patients with normal IOCs. Most LCBDEs in this series were performed via the cystic duct because of the stone characteristics and ductal anatomy. Selective laparoscopic placement of T-tubes in patients requiring choledochotomy (67%) appears to be a safe and effective alternative to routine T-tube drainage of the ductal system. ERCP, which was required for 5.8% of patients with abnormal cholangiograms, and open CBDE, which was used in 2.0%, still play an important role in the management of common bile duct pathology. The role of ERCP, with or without sphincterotomy, has returned to its status in the prelaparoscopic era. LCBDE may be employed successfully in the vast majority of patients harboring CBD stones.     

腹腔镜胆总管探查、一期缝合和T管引流后胆道压力变化的比较

目的比较分析腹腔镜胆总管探查、取石后一期缝合胆总管和T管引流后胆道压力的变化，为腹腔镜胆总管探查、一期缝合的可行性提供试验依据。方法比较我院2003年8月-2004年1月30例腹腔镜胆总管探查、取石后胆道压力的变化，其中一期缝合15例，T管引流15例。结果①胆总管静水压测定值为6．0～18．5cmH2O（0．54-1．66kPa）。②胆道压力：一期缝合组术前、后比较，术后第l天胆道压力轻度增高，术后第5天明显下降（q=4．53l，P〈0．05）。T管引流组术后第5天胆总管压力较术前明显下降（q=3．440，P〈0．05）。2组术中测压无显著性差异（t=1．228，P=0．230），术后第1、3、5天比较2组均有显著差异（t=3．108，P=0．004；t=2．071，P=0．048；t=3．355，P=0．002），T管引流组胆道压力下降明显。结论腹腔镜胆总管探查、一期缝合后，胆总管压力无明显变化，说明此术式不会引起胆道压力过高而致胆漏；T管持续引流胆汁可降低胆总管压力。     

继发性胆总管结石两种开腹胆道探查手术方式的临床研究

目的 比较治疗继发性胆总管结石的两种开腹胆道探查手术方式(术中胆道镜经胆囊颈管胆总管探查术与传统胆道切开探查T管引流术)的临床效果.方法 符合入组标准病例113例,传统术式58例,经胆囊颈管胆道探查55例.对手术成功率、手术时间、术后并发症、住院时间、住院费用等指标行对照研究.结果 两组均成功完成手术且无严重术后并发症,手术时间经胆囊管胆道探查术组与传统手术组无显著差异,平均住院时间及住院费用经胆囊管胆道探查组显著低于传统手术组.结论 对于继发性胆总管结石,经胆囊颈管途径胆道探查较传统方式有较明显优势,应作为胆道探查的首选途径.