...
首页> 外文期刊>Archives of surgery. >Prospective randomized trial of LC+LCBDE vs ERCP/S+LC for common bile duct stone disease.
【24h】

Prospective randomized trial of LC+LCBDE vs ERCP/S+LC for common bile duct stone disease.

机译:LC + LCBDE与ERCP / S + LC的胆总管结石病前瞻性随机试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcome parameters for good-risk patients with classic signs, symptoms, and laboratory and abdominal imaging features of cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis randomized to either laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LC+LCBDE) or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography sphincterotomy plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP/S+LC). DESIGN: Our study was a prospective trial conducted following written informed consent, with randomization by the serially numbered, opaque envelope technique. SETTING: Our institution is an academic teaching hospital and the central receiving and trauma center for the City and County of San Francisco, California. PATIENTS: We randomized 122 patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1 or 2) meeting entry criteria. Ten of these patients, excluded from outcome analysis, were protocol violators having signed out of the hospital against medical advice before 1 or both procedures were completed. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment was preoperative ERCP/S followed by LC, or LC+LCBDE. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was efficacy of stone clearance from the common bile duct. Secondary end points were length of hospital stay, cost of index hospitalization, professional fees, hospital charges, morbidity and mortality, and patient acceptance and quality of life scores. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics of the 2 randomized groups were similar. Efficacy of stone clearance was likewise equivalent for both groups. The time from first procedure to discharge was significantly shorter for LC+LCBDE (mean [SD], 55 [45] hours vs 98 [83] hours; P < .001). Hospital service and total charges for index hospitalization were likewise lower for LC+LCBDE, but the differences were not statistically significant. The professional fee charges for LC+LCBDE were significantly lower than those for ERCP/S+LC (median [SD], Dollars 4820 [1637] vs Dollars 6139 [1583]; P < .001). Patient acceptance and quality of life scores were equivalent for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both ERCP/S+LC and LC+LCBDE were highly effective in detecting and removing common bile duct stones and were equivalent in overall cost and patient acceptance. However, the overall duration of hospitalization was shorter and physician fees lower for LC+LCBDE. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00807729.
机译:目的:比较具有典型体征,症状,胆囊结石症和胆总管结石的实验室和腹部影像学特征的高危患者的结局参数,这些患者随机分为腹腔镜胆囊切除术加腹腔镜胆总管探查术(LC + LCBDE)或内镜逆行胰胆管造影加腹腔镜胆囊切除术(ERCP / S + LC)。设计:我们的研究是一项前瞻性试验,该研究是在获得知情同意书后进行的,并采用不透明的连续编号技术对患者进行随机分组。地点:我们的机构是一所学术教学医院,也是加利福尼亚州旧金山市和县的中央接收和创伤中心。患者:我们随机入选了符合入组标准的122例患者(美国麻醉医师协会1级或2级)。这些患者中有10名被排除在结局分析之外,是违反规章制度的人,在完成一项或两项程序之前,已根据医嘱退出医院。干预措施:术前先行ERCP / S治疗,然后行LC或LC + LCBDE治疗。主要观察指标:主要结局指标是清除胆总管结石的功效。次要终点是住院时间,索引住院费用,专业费用,医院收费,发病率和死亡率以及患者的接受程度和生活质量得分。结果:2个随机分组的基线特征相似。两组的结石清除效率同样相等。对于LC + LCBDE,从第一次手术到出院的时间明显缩短(平均[SD]:55 [45]小时与98 [83]小时; P <.001)。 LC + LCBDE的住院服务和指数住院总费用同样较低,但差异无统计学意义。 LC + LCBDE的专业费用明显低于ERCP / S + LC的专业费用(中位数[SD],4820美元[1637]对6139美元[1583]; P <.001)。两组患者的接受程度和生活质量得分均相等。结论:ERCP / S + LC和LC + LCBDE在检测和清除胆总管结石方面均非常有效,在总成本和患者接受度方面均相当。但是,LC + LCBDE的总体住院时间较短,医师费用较低。试验注册:clinicaltrials.gov标识符:NCT00807729。

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