Four hundred and eighty two paients suffering from intrahepatic bile duct stone undergoing lobectomy and segmental resection (from 1975 to 1994,9) has reported. 63% of the patient in this group underwent 1-5 operations, including different types of biliary-intestinal anastomosis (21.6%). 482 cases underwent different types of hepatectomy, including left lateral-lobetomy 321 cases (66.6%),left hemihepatectomy 80 cases(16.6%), right hemihepatectomy 19 cases (3.9%), and multiple segmental resections 39 cases (8.1%, including Ⅴ+Ⅷ 11 cases, Ⅵ+Ⅶ 28 cases). Other type hepatectomy combined with guadrate lobectomy 20 cases (4.1%). Postoperative complication rate was 10.2%, including diliary fistula. hemobilia and subdiaphragmatic and resectional surface infectioin, 85% of the patients were followed up with an excellent result of 88%. The authors emphsize that hepatic lobectomy nad segmental resection is the core of treatment and selection of operative methods depends on clinical-patholigic types of the disease.
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.
Objective To summarize contents of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) and understand it’s status and prospect in application of patients with hepatolithiasis. Methods The descriptions of ERAS in recent years and applications in hepatolithiasis were reviewed. Results The ERAS programme mainly included the preoperative managements, such as the education, nutrition management, and gastrointestinal tract management; the intraoperative managements, such as the minimally invasive surgery, reasonable choice of anesthesia, infusion volume management, and maintenance of body temperature, analgesia, and preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting medication selection; the postoperative early feeding, early exercise, early extubation, multimodal analgesia, T tube management, reasonable discharge standard and follow-up management. Although the ERAS was rarely reported in patients with hepatolithiasis, it had some advantages of promoting recovery and improving patient satisfaction, and it was still effective and safe. Conclusions Application of ERAS concept in patients with hepatolithiasis has achieved precision management and individualized treatment during perioperative period. It could achieve a good short-term therapeutic effect and optimize medical management model. However, there are still some problems at the present stage in implementation and promotion of patients with hepatolithiasis, such as lacks of criteria and specifications, evidence-based medicine. It is needed to further strengthen communication and collaboration among multiple disciplinary teams so as to further improve ERAS programme and popularize it.
Objective To evaluate the clinical value of ureteroscope in cholelithiasis treated by laparoscopic surgery. Methods The clinical data of 36 patients admitted because of hepatolithus with ureteroscope combination in laparoscopic surgery from February 2007 to September 2009 in Guidong People’s Hospital of Guangxi were analyzed retrospectively. Results In 33 cases, stones were removed once by ureteroscope in laparoscopic surgery with residual stones (in 3 cases residual stone were removed secondarily through T tube) and the other 3 cases were transferred to laparotomy forcedly due to bleeding of biliary duct and vessels of porta hepatis and tearing of bile duct. During operation, blood loss was 30-280 (94.51±54.70) ml; operation time was 110-260 (147.22±48.45) min; recovery time of bowel movement was 1-3 (2.03±0.76) d; postoperative hospitalization time was 6-13 (7.12±1.65) d (some discharged with T tube); the time of patients of T tubes pulled out was 28-45 (38.92±6.52) d. Bile leakage happened in 1 case and infection of biliary tract in 1 case, no complications such as biliary stricture or bile duct bleeding were found after operation. Conclusions Treatment of intrahepatic bile duct or a single extra-hepatic sand-like stones with ureteroscopy usage in laparoscopic surgery is feasible and less invasive. It is a minimally invasive treatment for intra- or extra-hepatic stones due to rapidly postoperative rehabilitation.
目的 探讨与评价术中B超定位下经肝胆管取石在肝内胆管结石治疗中的手术指征及优劣性。方法 总结2002～2006 年29例肝内胆管结石行肝叶切除+经肝胆管取石患者的临床资料,对其手术效果及并发症进行分析。结果 无胆管损伤及手术死亡病例, 并发症发生率为37.93%，残石率为10.34%。结论 术中B超定位下经肝胆管取石结合肝叶切除对肝内胆管结石是一种较好的治疗方式，主要适用于Ⅱb型肝内胆管结石患者。
After analysising 15 patients with portal hypertension (PHT) in secondary biliary cirrhosis due to hepatolithiasis, the authors consider that the surgical procedure depends on indivedual’s specificity: majority of patients with PHT but no hemorrhage may be treated by removing the hepatobiliary stone, resolving the bile duct stricture and then reconstructing it as the first step. Whether or not to dispose of PHT depended on the postoperative condition. If the patient had previous hemorrhage and is accompanied by severe obstructive jaundice, splenectomy with shunt and simple biliary external drainage is the choice and removal of stone with biliary tract reconstruction will be performed in the second stage. Meanwhile, it is very important to monitor perioperative condition of the patient and treat the complications.
ObjectiveTo investigate the feasibility and safety of percutaneous transhepatic choledochoscopic lithotripsy (PTCSL) in the treatment of recurrent type Ⅱa hepatolithiasis.MethodsAll of 293 patients with recurrent type Ⅱa hepatolithiasis admitted to the Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University from December 2010 to December 2017 were collected retrospectively, 82 of whom were treated with the PTCSL (PTCSL group), 211 of whom were treated with traditional open surgery (open group). The patients were matched according to the ratio of 1∶1 by using the method of propensity score matching, then the patients were compared after matching.ResultsA total of 59 pairs were successfully matched, that was, there were 59 patients in the PTCSL group and open group, respectively. Compared with the open group, the PTCSL group had the similar conditions such as the gender, age, preoperative Child-Pugh classification, and times of previous biliary operations, etc. (P>0.050). There was no perioperative death in both groups. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the success rate, operation time, times of operations, time of T tube removal after operation, stone residual rate, and stone recurrence rate (P>0.050). Although the hospital costs of the PTCSL group was higher than that of the open group (P<0.050), the PTCSL group had various advantages, such as less intraoperative bleeding, smaller incisional scar, shorter hospital stay and postoperative ventilation time, and lower rate of total postoperative complications (P<0.050).ConclusionsAfter learning curve, PTCSL has many advantages over traditional open surgery in treatment of recurrent type Ⅱa hepatolithiasis. PTCSL is a minimally invasive surgery, which is safe and effective.