首页> 外文期刊>Journal of laparoendoscopic and advanced surgical techniques, Part A >Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with T-tube choledochotomy for the management of choledocholithiasis.
【24h】

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with T-tube choledochotomy for the management of choledocholithiasis.

机译:腹腔镜胆总管探查与T管胆总管切开术治疗胆总管结石症。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has become the gold standard for the management of gallstone disease, the application of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for choledocholithiasis has been slower. The aim of this study is to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of LCBDE. A retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare LCBDE (n = 82) with conventional common bile duct exploration (CCBDE) (n = 75) and endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) (n = 80) in the management of choledocholithiasis. All our LCBDEs were performed through choledochotomy with T-tube placement. The mean operative time of the LCBDE group (124 +/-48 minutes) was not significantly longer then the CCBDE group (118 +/-35 minutes), while the postoperative hospitalization was shorter in both the LCBDE (8 +/-5 days) and EST (9 +/-4 days) groups than in the CCBDE (13 +/-6 days) group. In the LCBDE group, 14 patients (17.1%) required postoperative choledochoscopy to clear residual stones through the T-tube tract.The only mortality occurred in the CCBDE group. The morbidity rate was 3.7% (3/82) in the LCBDE group, including bile leakage in 1 case and bile peritonitis in 2 cases; 6.7% (5/75) in the CCBDE group, including atlectasis in 2 cases, sepsis in 1, and wound infection in 2. There were 2 cases of postoperative pancreatitis (2.5%; 2/80) in the EST group. The difference in the average number of sessions needed for complete clearance of choledocholithiasis in each group was statistically significant (EST, 1.46 +/-0.67; LCBDE, 1.23 +/-0.42; and CCBDE, 1.09 +/-0.28; P < 0.0001). Our results suggested that EST and LCBDE tended to require more therapeutic sessions then CCBDE, although these sessions were less invasive. The benefits of LCBDE include minimal invasiveness, concurrent treatment of gallbladder stone and CBD stones in a single session, and a shorter postoperative hospital stay. However a longer learning curve is needed. Selection of the most suitable therapeutic option for individual patients by an experienced surgeon gives the most benefits to patients.
机译:尽管腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)已成为管理胆结石疾病的金标准,但腹腔镜胆总管探查术(LCBDE)在胆总管结石症治疗中的应用较慢。这项研究的目的是确定LCBDE的可行性和有效性。进行了一项回顾性队列研究,以比较LCBDE(n = 82)与常规胆总管探查术(CCBDE)(n = 75)和内镜括约肌切开术(EST)(n = 80)在胆总管结石的治疗中的作用。我们所有的LCBDE均通过胆管切开术和T管放置进行。 LCBDE组的平均手术时间(124 +/- 48分钟)并不比CCBDE组的平均手术时间(118 +/- 35分钟)长得多,而两个LCBDE组的术后住院时间都较短(8 +/- 5天) )和EST(9 +/- 4天)组,而不是CCBDE(13 +/- 6天)组。 LCBDE组中有14例(17.1%)的患者需要进行术后胆道镜检查以清除T管中残留的结石。 LCBDE组的发病率为3.7%(3/82),其中胆汁渗漏1例,胆汁性腹膜炎2例; CCBDE组为6.7%(5/75),其中包括不张性2例,败血症1例,伤口感染2例。EST组有2例术后胰腺炎(2.5%; 2/80)。每组完全清除胆总管结石所需的平均疗程数差异具有统计学意义(EST,1.46 +/- 0.67; LCBDE,1.23 +/- 0.42; CCBDE,1.09 +/- 0.28; P <0.0001) 。我们的结果表明,尽管EST和LCBDE的侵入性较小,但它们往往比CCBDE需要更多的治疗。 LCBDE的好处包括微创,在一次治疗中同时治疗胆囊结石和CBD结石以及缩短术后住院时间。但是,需要更长的学习曲线。经验丰富的外科医生为个别患者选择最合适的治疗方案将为患者带来最大的收益。

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