首页> 外文期刊>Hepato-gastroenterology. >Antegrade biliary stenting versus T-tube drainage after laparoscopic choledochotomy--a comparative cohort study.
【24h】

Antegrade biliary stenting versus T-tube drainage after laparoscopic choledochotomy--a comparative cohort study.

机译:腹腔镜胆总管切开术后胆总管支架置入与T管引流的比较研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct (LECBD) has been proven to be an effective and preferred treatment approach for uncomplicated common bile duct stones. However there is still controversy regarding the choice of biliary decompression after laparoscopic choledochotomy. METHODOLOGY: This is a retrospective comparison between the use of antegrade biliary stenting and T-tube drainage following successful laparoscopic choledochotomy. During the period between January 1995 and July 2003, biliary decompression was achieved by either antegrade biliary stenting or T-tube drainage based on the discretion of the operating surgeon. For antegrade biliary stenting, a 10-Fr Cotton-Leung biliary stent was inserted through the choledochotomy and passed down across the papilla. The stent position was confirmed by on-table choledochoscopy before interrupted single-layered closure of the common bile duct. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was performed to remove the stent 4 weeks after operation and at the same time to check for any residual stones or other complications like stricture or leak. In the T-tube group, a 16-Fr latex T-tube was used and the long limb was brought out through the subcostal trocar port followed by the same method of bile duct closure. Cholangiogram through the T-tube was performed on day 7 and the tube would be taken off 1 week later (about 2 weeks after operation) if the cholangiogram did not reveal any abnormality. The two groups were compared according to the demographic data, operation time, length of hospital stay and complication rates. RESULTS: During the study period, 108 laparoscopic explorations of the common bile duct were performed in our centre of which 95 were attempted laparoscopic choledochotomies and 13 were transcystic duct explorations. Of the 95 patients with attempted laparoscopic choledochotomy, there were 9 open conversions, 17 laparoscopic bilioenteric bypasses and 6 primary closures of the common bile duct. All of these patients together with those receiving transcystic duct explorations were excluded and the remaining 63 patients having postoperative bile diversion by either antegrade biliary stenting or T-tube drainage were included in this study. Bile diversion was achieved by antegrade biliary stenting in 35 patients whereas 28 patients had T-tube drainage. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of age, clinical presentation, bilirubin level, length of hospital stay, follow-up duration, common bile duct size, size of common bile duct stones, incidence of residual/recurrent stone and complication rate. It was observed that more patients in the stenting group developed bile leak (14.2% vs. 3.5%) and required more intramuscular pethidine injections (182.86 +/- 139.30 vs. 92.81+/-81.15mg, P=0.000). On the other hand, the T-tube group had longer operation time (141.4+/-45.1 vs. 11 1.1+/-33.9 minutes, P=0.006) and had a longer postoperative hospital stay (10.0+/-7.4 vs. 8.8+/-9.3 days, P=0.020) reaching statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative bile diversion by antegrade biliary stenting after laparoscopic choledochotomy is shown to shorten operation duration and postoperative stay as compared to T-tube drainage, but the problem of bile leak needs further refinement of insertion technique.
机译:背景/目的:腹腔镜检查胆总管(LECBD)已被证明是一种有效且首选的治疗方法,用于简单的胆总管结石。然而,关于腹腔镜胆总管切开术后胆道减压的选择仍存在争议。方法:这是在成功进行腹腔镜胆总管切开术后使用顺行胆道支架和T管引流之间的回顾性比较。在1995年1月至2003年7月期间,根据手术医师的判断,通过顺行胆道支架置入术或T形管引流术实现了胆道减压。对于顺行胆道支架术,将10-Fr棉-棉胆道支架通过胆总管切开术插入并向下穿过乳头。在中断胆总管的单层闭合之前,通过台式胆道镜检查确认支架位置。内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)是在术后4周取出支架,同时检查是否有残留的结石或其他并发症,例如狭窄或渗漏。在T型管组中,使用16-Fr乳胶T型管,并通过肋下套管针端口引出长肢,然后采用相同的胆管闭合方法。在第7天通过T型管进行胆管造影,如果胆管造影未发现任何异常,则将在1周后(手术后约2周)取下该管。根据人口统计学资料,手术时间,住院时间和并发症发生率对两组进行比较。结果:在研究期间,在我们的中心进行了108例腹腔镜胆总管探查,其中95例尝试了腹腔镜胆总管切开术,而13例经了胆囊管探查。在95例尝试进行腹腔镜胆总管切开术的患者中,有9例进行了开腹手术,有17例进行了腹腔镜胆囊切除术,并进行了6次胆总管闭合术。所有这些患者以及接受经囊性导管探查的患者均被排除在外,其余63例因顺行性胆道支架置入术或T管引流而术后胆汁转移的患者也包括在本研究中。通过顺行胆道支架置入术可实现胆汁转移,其中35例患者行T管引流。两组在年龄,临床表现,胆红素水平,住院时间,随访时间,胆总管大小,胆总管结石大小,残余/复发性结石发生率和并发症发生率方面无差异。观察到支架植入组中更多的患者出现胆漏(14.2%比3.5%),并且需要更多的肌内注射哌替啶(182.86 +/- 139.30 vs. 92.81 +/- 81.15mg,P = 0.000)。另一方面,T型管组手术时间更长(141.4 +/- 45.1 vs. 11 1.1 +/- 33.9分钟,P = 0.006),并且术后住院时间更长(10.0 +/- 7.4 vs. 8.8)。 +/- 9.3天,P = 0.020)达到统计学意义。结论:与T管引流相比,腹腔镜胆总管切开术后顺行胆道支架置入胆道可缩短手术时间并缩短术后停留时间,但胆漏的问题需要进一步完善。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号