Objective To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of ERCP/S+LC and LC+LCBDE in cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Methods A fully recursive literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMbase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in any language. By using a defined search strategy, both the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials on comparing ERCP/ S+LC with LC+LCBDE in cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis were identified. Data were extracted and evaluated by two reviewers independently. The quality of the included trials was evaluated. Meta-analyses were conducted using the Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 5.0.2 software. Results Fourteen controlled clinical trials (1 544 patients) were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that: a) There were no significant difference in the stone clearance rate between the two groups (RR=0.96, 95%CI 0.92 to 1.01, P=0.14); b) There were no significant difference in the residual stone rate between the two groups (OR=1.05, 95%CI 0.65 to 1.72, P=0.83); c) There were no significant difference in the complications morbidity between the two groups (OR=1.12, 95%CI 0.85 to 1.55, P=0.48); d) There were no significant difference in the mortality during follow-up visit between the two groups (RD= 0.00, 95%CI –0.03 to 0.03, P=0.84); e) The length of hospital stay in the LC+LCBDE group was shorter than that of the ERCP/S+LC group with significant difference (WMD= 1.78, 95%CI 0.94 to 2.62, Plt;0.000 1); and f) The LC+LCBDE group was superior to the ERCP/S+LC group in the aspects of procedure time and total hospital charges. Conclusion Although there aren’t differences in the effectiveness and safety between the ERCP/S+LC group and the LC+LCBDE group, the latter is superior to the former in procedure time, length of hospital stay and total hospital charges. For the influencing factors of lower quality and astable statistical outcomes of the included studies, this conclusion has to be verified with more strictly designed large scale RCTs.
目的 探讨纤维胆道镜在胆道探查术中及术后的应用价值。方法 对113例在胆道探查术中及术后应用纤维胆道镜治疗患者的疗效进行回顾性分析。结果 23例胆总管扩张合并黄疸且术前未见结石的患者，其中19例术中胆道镜发现结石并于术中取净结石，2例炎性狭窄，1例胆管癌，1例未见异常。58例胆总管结石患者术中胆道镜取净结石。32例肝内、外胆管结石患者术中胆道镜取净结石21例; 2例胆道镜发现结石集中于肝左外叶合并肝内胆管狭窄, 行肝左外叶切除; 其余9例患者的结石术中未取净，于术后6～8周再经胆道镜T管窦道取净结石。113例患者术后均无严重并发症发生。术后获随访98例（86.7%），随访时间6～24个月，平均14个月，2例复发，其余96例未见结石复发。结论术中应用纤维胆道镜可明确胆管内病变，降低胆管残余结石的发生率; 术后经T管窦道取石是治疗胆管残余结石的有效方法，可避免再次手术的痛苦。
Objective To investigate feasibility and clinical efficacy of exploration and stone removal through choledochoscope via hepatic cross-section during laparoscopic left lateral hepatectomy for hepatolithiasis. Methods The patients who had left extrahepatic bile duct stones with choledocholithiasis from January 2012 to December 2016 were retrospectively collected. Among these patients, 29 cases underwent an exploration and stone removal through choledochoscope via hepatic cross-section during laparoscopic left lateral hepatectomy (observation group) and 26 cases underwent an exploration and stone removal through choledochoscope via incision of common bile duct during laparoscopic left lateral hepatectomy (control group). The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative nutritional, and complications rate were compared between these two groups. Results The operations were performed successfully and no perioperative death happened in both groups. There were no significant differences in the operative time and intraoperative blood loss between the two groups (P>0.05). Moreover, the postoperative hospital stay of the observation group was significantly shorter than that of the control group (P<0.05). In addition, there were no significant differences in the complications of the bile leakage, subphrenic infection, and biliary residual stones between the two groups (P>0.05). Also, the levels of prealbumin and the lymphocytes in the observation group were significantly higher than those in the control group on the 3rd and 6th day after the operation (P<0.05). Conclusions Preliminary results of limited cases in this study show that exploration and removal of stones through choledochoscope via hepatic cross-section during laparoscopic left lateral hepatectomy for hepatolithiasis is relatively safe and reliable, its procedure is simplified, could avoid relevant complications due to biliary incision and T tube drainage.
ObjectiveTo explore the diagnostic value of “Four-Step Procedure” of laparoscopic exploration in patients with peritoneal metastasis of gastric cancer.MethodsWe retrospectively collected the data of 409 gastric adenocarcinoma patients from July 2016 to August 2020 who underwent “Four-Step Procedure” of laparoscopic exploration in West China Hospital. The descriptive case series study was conducted to analyze the outcome of laparoscopic exploration combined with CY (cytology test), stepwise treatment plans, and the rates of CY1 and P1 (peritoneal metastasis) among cT3–4 patients during different periods. SPSS 22.0 software was used to conduct the univariate and multivariate logistic regression to analyze the high risk factors associated with P1 and (or) CY1.ResultsA total of 409 gastric adenocarcinoma patients who underwent laparoscopic exploration were enrolled in our study. Among them, 65 patients were confirmed to be P1 and (or) CY1. Stratified analysis by cT and cN staging showed that there were 7 (7.4%) and 55 (27.9%) patients with peritoneal metastasis in cT3 staging and cT4 staging, respectively. After laparoscopic exploration, 168 patients received laparoscopic gastrectomy, 35 patients received laparotomy, 143 patients received neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, and 63 patients received conversion therapy. The bar chart showed an ascending tendency in the diagnosis rate of P1 over time among cT3–4 patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that ascites was an independent risk factor of CY1 and (or) P1 (P<0.001). Additionally, the postoperative complication rate was 2.9% in the patients who merely underwent laparoscopic exploration, including 4 patients with pulmonary infection and 2 patients with urinary retention.Conclusions“Four-Step Procedure” of laparoscopic exploration is reliable and feasible for gastric cancer. “Four-Step Procedure” of laparoscopic exploration has high diagnostic value for peritoneal metastasis of gastric cancer. Our study shows that most of peritoneal metastasis distribute in cT3 and cT4 patients. For these patients, laparoscopic exploration should be recommended to identify if peritoneal metastasis exists and avoid unnecessary laparotomy.
目的 总结开展腹腔镜下经胆囊管胆总管探查取石的手术技巧及应用体会。方法 回顾性分析笔者所在医院肝胆外科2010年7月至2012年12月期间行腹腔镜经胆囊管胆总管探查取石术的36例患者的临床资料。结果 30例病例经胆道探条扩张胆囊管后直接完成网篮取石，3例经胆囊管汇入胆总管处微切开完成取石，3例经胆道镜联合激光碎石完成手术。全组病例的手术时间为（110.88±25.99） min，术后住院时间为（6.59±1.18） d，均无严重操作相关并发症发生。结论 腹腔镜下经胆囊管胆总管探查取石术是安全可行的，若能综合各种技术，可提高手术的成功率。
ObjectiveTo summarize the clinical experience on primary suture after common bile duct exploration and to investigate its clinical indications and curative effects. MethodsThe clinical data of 137 patients underwent primary closure of common bile duct between February 2006 and June 2010 were analyzed retrospectively. ResultsAll operations were successful. The operative time ranged from 65-213 min (mean 129 min) and the blood loss ranged from 50-350 ml with an average of 148 ml. One hundred and twenty-four patients (90.5%) were discharged from hospital without complications within 7 d after operation. Postoperative bile leakage occurred in 13 patients (9.5%) consisted of 10 early stage cases (18.5%, 10/54) and 3 later stage cases (3.6%, 3/83), which were discharged with improvement by conservative treatment within 3 weeks after operation. Totally 113 patients (82.5%) were followed up for 2-54 months with a median time of 14 months, no residual or retained stone and biliary duct stricture occurred. ConclusionOnly with the strict indication and proficient surgical technology, primary suture after common bile duct exploration is a safe and effective way to choledocholithiasis.
目的 探讨特发性结肠穿孔的治疗方法及成因。方法 结合文献分析2001～2009年期间我院收治的特发性结肠穿孔患者的诊治经过。结果 共收治特发性结肠穿孔9例，占同期结肠穿孔患者的28.1%（9/32），其中5例穿孔（5/9）发生在乙状结肠。修剪破口后直接缝合者2例，行结肠双腔造瘘者7例。术后死亡3例。结论 特发性结肠穿孔好发于乙状结肠，与其解剖和生理上的特点有关。不明原因结肠穿孔的患者要想到本病的可能。及时、合理的手术治疗，仔细周到的术后管理是治疗成功的关键。
目的比较腹腔镜胆囊切除联合胆总管探查术（LC＋LCBDE）与内镜下Oddi括约肌切开取石联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术（EST＋LC）治疗胆囊结石合并肝外胆管结石的临床疗效。 方法回顾性分析45例行LC＋LCBDE及60例行EST＋LC患者的临床资料，观察2组在单次结石清除率、中转手术率、手术并发症、住院时间等指标方面的效果。 结果2组患者的基线资料相近，无手术死亡病例；2组术后并发症发生情况的差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；LC＋LCBDE组单次治疗成功率高于EST＋LC组，而住院时间及中转手术率则短于或低于EST＋LC组（P＜0.05）。 结论LC＋LCBDE是治疗胆囊结石合并肝外胆管结石患者安全有效的方法。
ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and common bile duct exploration(LCBDE) with biliary stent drainage or T tube drainage. MethodsThe clinical data of 68 cases of gallbladder and bile duct stones with the LCBDE by the same surgeon in our hospital from June 2008 to June 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. Twenty-two patients were treated with LCBDE and biliary stent drainage(stent drainage group), 46 patients were treated with LCBDE and T tube drainage(T tube drainage group). ResultsThe operation were successfully completed of 2 groups. The anal exhaust time, peritoneal drainage time, postoperative hospitalization time, and hospital expenses in stent drainage group were shorter or less than thoes T tube drainage group(P < 0.05). There were no significant difference in the operative time, postoperative bilirubin level, and incidences of postoperative complications between the two groups(P > 0.05). ConclusionsThe stent drainage and T tube drainage after LCBDE has its own indications. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and biliary stent drainage is superior to the laparo-scopic common bile duct exploration and T tube drainage.