One-stage laparoscopic versus two-stage endoscopic followed by laparoscopic treatment for cholecystolithiasis complicated with choledocholithiasis

Guotai Wang, Xingwu Yang, Qing Wang, Xin Wang, Ning Li
{"title":"One-stage laparoscopic versus two-stage endoscopic followed by laparoscopic treatment for cholecystolithiasis complicated with choledocholithiasis","authors":"Guotai Wang, Xingwu Yang, Qing Wang, Xin Wang, Ning Li","doi":"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1007-8118.2020.02.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective \nTo compare the clinical efficacy of one-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) plus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) with primary suture (PS) versus two-stage endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)/endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST) followed by LC in treatment of cholecystolithiasis complicated with choledocholithiasis. \n \n \nMethods \nThe clinical data of 171 patients with cholecystolithiasis complicated with choledocholithiasis, who underwent minimally invasive surgical treatment from January 2016 to December 2017, were retrospectively analyzed. Of these patients, 90 underwent one-stage LC+ LCBDE+ PS (the one-stage group), and 81 underwent two-stage ERCP/EST followed by LC (the two-stage group). The main clinical variables between the two groups of patients were compared. \n \n \nResults \nThe surgical success rates (94.4% vs. 95.1%), residual stone rates (3.3% vs. 4.9%) and incidences of postoperative complications (6.7% vs.8.6%) showed no significant difference (all P>0.05) between the one-stage and two-stage groups. Compared with the two-stage group, the operative time was shorter (110.4 vs. 135.7 min), the length of postoperative hospital stay was shorter (3.3 vs. 7.1 d) and the total hospitalization cost was reduced (22 756.2 vs. 31 429.3 yuan) in the one-stage group. The incidence of long-term complications (2.2% vs.9.9%) in the one-stage group was also lower than that in the two-stage group (both P<0.05). \n \n \nConclusions \nBoth one-stage LC+ LCBDE+ PS and two-stage ERCP/EST+ LC are safe and effective in the treatment of cholecystolithiasis complicated with choledocholithiasis. One-stage LC+ LCBDE+ PS shows obvious advantages in hospitalization stay, hospitalization cost and in the preservation of function of the Oddi sphincter, and therefore should be the first choice in most cases. \n \n \nKey words: \nCholecystolithiasis; Choledocholithiasis; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic retrograde","PeriodicalId":10021,"journal":{"name":"中华肝胆外科杂志","volume":"26 1","pages":"115-118"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中华肝胆外科杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1007-8118.2020.02.007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of one-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) plus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) with primary suture (PS) versus two-stage endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)/endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST) followed by LC in treatment of cholecystolithiasis complicated with choledocholithiasis. Methods The clinical data of 171 patients with cholecystolithiasis complicated with choledocholithiasis, who underwent minimally invasive surgical treatment from January 2016 to December 2017, were retrospectively analyzed. Of these patients, 90 underwent one-stage LC+ LCBDE+ PS (the one-stage group), and 81 underwent two-stage ERCP/EST followed by LC (the two-stage group). The main clinical variables between the two groups of patients were compared. Results The surgical success rates (94.4% vs. 95.1%), residual stone rates (3.3% vs. 4.9%) and incidences of postoperative complications (6.7% vs.8.6%) showed no significant difference (all P>0.05) between the one-stage and two-stage groups. Compared with the two-stage group, the operative time was shorter (110.4 vs. 135.7 min), the length of postoperative hospital stay was shorter (3.3 vs. 7.1 d) and the total hospitalization cost was reduced (22 756.2 vs. 31 429.3 yuan) in the one-stage group. The incidence of long-term complications (2.2% vs.9.9%) in the one-stage group was also lower than that in the two-stage group (both P<0.05). Conclusions Both one-stage LC+ LCBDE+ PS and two-stage ERCP/EST+ LC are safe and effective in the treatment of cholecystolithiasis complicated with choledocholithiasis. One-stage LC+ LCBDE+ PS shows obvious advantages in hospitalization stay, hospitalization cost and in the preservation of function of the Oddi sphincter, and therefore should be the first choice in most cases. Key words: Cholecystolithiasis; Choledocholithiasis; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic retrograde
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一期腹腔镜与两期内窥镜后腹腔镜治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石
目的比较一期腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)加腹腔镜胆总管探查(LCBDE)加一期缝合(PS)与二期内镜逆行胆管造影(ERCP)/内镜下括括肌切开术(EST)加LC治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2016年1月至2017年12月行微创手术治疗的171例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者的临床资料。在这些患者中,90例接受了一期LC+ LCBDE+ PS(一期组),81例接受了两期ERCP/EST后再进行LC(两期组)。比较两组患者的主要临床指标。结果两组手术成功率(94.4%比95.1%)、结石残留率(3.3%比4.9%)、术后并发症发生率(6.7%比8.6%)差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。与两期组相比,一期组手术时间短(110.4 min vs. 135.7 min),住院时间短(3.3 d vs. 7.1 d),总住院费用低(22 756.2 vs. 31 429.3元)。一期组长期并发症发生率(2.2% vs.9.9%)也低于两期组(P<0.05)。结论一期LC+ LCBDE+ PS和二期ERCP/EST+ LC治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石均安全有效。一期LC+ LCBDE+ PS在住院时间、住院费用和保留Oddi括约肌功能方面具有明显优势,在大多数情况下应作为首选。关键词:胆囊结石;黄疸;胆囊切除术,腹腔镜;胆管造影,内窥镜逆行
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
中华肝胆外科杂志
中华肝胆外科杂志 Medicine-Gastroenterology
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7101
期刊介绍: Chinese Journal of Hepatobiliary Surgery is an academic journal organized by the Chinese Medical Association and supervised by the China Association for Science and Technology, founded in 1995. The journal has the following columns: review, hot spotlight, academic thinking, thesis, experimental research, short thesis, case report, synthesis, etc. The journal has been recognized by Beida Journal (Chinese Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences). Chinese Journal of Hepatobiliary Surgery has been included in famous databases such as Peking University Journal (Chinese Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences), CSCD Source Journals of China Science Citation Database (with Extended Version) and so on, and it is one of the national key academic journals under the supervision of China Association for Science and Technology.
期刊最新文献
Therapeutic efficacy of external and internal-external percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in patients with malignant obstructive jaundice Combined postoperative adjuvant transarterial chemoembolization and portal vein chemotherapy to treat patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and portal vein tumor thrombosis: a meta-analysis Retrograde approach to the retroperitoneal Castleman disease: a case report and literature review Application of laparoscopy in liver metastasis of colorectal cancer Hepatic biloma after minimally invasive interventional therapies: treatment and outcomes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1