Fuguo Liu, Lunhe Ye, Yongkun Wang, Zinan Zhao, Muladili Mutailipu, Xujing Wang, Qiqi Zhang, Bo Chen, Ran Cui
{"title":"LCBDE+LC与ERCP/EST+LC治疗胆石症合并胆总管结石的短期疗效:一项回顾性队列研究。","authors":"Fuguo Liu, Lunhe Ye, Yongkun Wang, Zinan Zhao, Muladili Mutailipu, Xujing Wang, Qiqi Zhang, Bo Chen, Ran Cui","doi":"10.1089/lap.2024.0345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> Minimally invasive treatments for cholelithiasis have gained popularity. The complexity of diagnosing and treating choledocholithiasis offers multiple surgical options, including laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE+LC) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and/or endoscopic sphincterotomy plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP/EST+LC). <b><i>Objective:</i></b> To compare outcomes in patients with typical signs, symptoms, laboratory, and imaging features of cholelithiasis combined with common bile duct stones, we retrospectively analyzed the short-term outcomes of LCBDE+LC and ERCP/EST+LC. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We analyzed 318 patients with gallbladder stones treated between January 2022 and May 2024. Of these, 152 underwent LCBDE+LC, and 166 underwent ERCP/EST+LC. We compared patients' baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and short-term complications between the two groups. The primary outcome was the effectiveness of choledochal stone removal, while secondary outcomes included length of stay, hospitalization costs, and patient satisfaction. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Patients' baseline characteristics were similar between the LCBDE+LC and ERCP/EST+LC groups. Stone clearance rates were comparable (97.37% versus 95.18%, <i>P</i> = .306), with a slight advantage in the LCBDE+LC group. The length of hospitalization was significantly shorter in the LCBDE+LC group (6.49 ± 1.18 days versus 6.77 ± 1.11 days, <i>P</i> < .05). The LCBDE+LC group also had lower total hospitalization costs ($5188.78 ± 861.26 versus $6498.76 ± 1190.58 <i>P</i> < .01). Additionally, the incidence of pancreatitis was lower in the LCBDE+LC group (0.66% versus 6.02%, <i>P</i> < .01). There were no significant differences between the groups in other short-term complications such as abdominal infection, cholangitis, biliary bleeding, or bile leakage. Postoperative follow-up indicated higher patient satisfaction and acceptance in the LCBDE+LC group (SSQ-8, 85.84 ± 4.31 points versus 81.20 ± 4.54 points, <i>P</i> < .01). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Our findings suggest that the LCBDE+LC holds promise as a safe and efficacious approach for the management of cholelithiasis combined with common bile duct stones. However, further prospective clinical trials are essential to corroborate these results and confirm their broader applicability.</p>","PeriodicalId":50166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Short-Term Efficacy of LCBDE+LC Versus ERCP/EST+LC in the Treatment of Cholelithiasis Combined with Common Bile Duct Stones: A Retrospective Cohort Study.\",\"authors\":\"Fuguo Liu, Lunhe Ye, Yongkun Wang, Zinan Zhao, Muladili Mutailipu, Xujing Wang, Qiqi Zhang, Bo Chen, Ran Cui\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/lap.2024.0345\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> Minimally invasive treatments for cholelithiasis have gained popularity. The complexity of diagnosing and treating choledocholithiasis offers multiple surgical options, including laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE+LC) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and/or endoscopic sphincterotomy plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP/EST+LC). <b><i>Objective:</i></b> To compare outcomes in patients with typical signs, symptoms, laboratory, and imaging features of cholelithiasis combined with common bile duct stones, we retrospectively analyzed the short-term outcomes of LCBDE+LC and ERCP/EST+LC. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We analyzed 318 patients with gallbladder stones treated between January 2022 and May 2024. Of these, 152 underwent LCBDE+LC, and 166 underwent ERCP/EST+LC. We compared patients' baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and short-term complications between the two groups. The primary outcome was the effectiveness of choledochal stone removal, while secondary outcomes included length of stay, hospitalization costs, and patient satisfaction. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Patients' baseline characteristics were similar between the LCBDE+LC and ERCP/EST+LC groups. Stone clearance rates were comparable (97.37% versus 95.18%, <i>P</i> = .306), with a slight advantage in the LCBDE+LC group. The length of hospitalization was significantly shorter in the LCBDE+LC group (6.49 ± 1.18 days versus 6.77 ± 1.11 days, <i>P</i> < .05). The LCBDE+LC group also had lower total hospitalization costs ($5188.78 ± 861.26 versus $6498.76 ± 1190.58 <i>P</i> < .01). Additionally, the incidence of pancreatitis was lower in the LCBDE+LC group (0.66% versus 6.02%, <i>P</i> < .01). There were no significant differences between the groups in other short-term complications such as abdominal infection, cholangitis, biliary bleeding, or bile leakage. Postoperative follow-up indicated higher patient satisfaction and acceptance in the LCBDE+LC group (SSQ-8, 85.84 ± 4.31 points versus 81.20 ± 4.54 points, <i>P</i> < .01). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Our findings suggest that the LCBDE+LC holds promise as a safe and efficacious approach for the management of cholelithiasis combined with common bile duct stones. However, further prospective clinical trials are essential to corroborate these results and confirm their broader applicability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2024.0345\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2024.0345","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Short-Term Efficacy of LCBDE+LC Versus ERCP/EST+LC in the Treatment of Cholelithiasis Combined with Common Bile Duct Stones: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Background: Minimally invasive treatments for cholelithiasis have gained popularity. The complexity of diagnosing and treating choledocholithiasis offers multiple surgical options, including laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE+LC) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and/or endoscopic sphincterotomy plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP/EST+LC). Objective: To compare outcomes in patients with typical signs, symptoms, laboratory, and imaging features of cholelithiasis combined with common bile duct stones, we retrospectively analyzed the short-term outcomes of LCBDE+LC and ERCP/EST+LC. Methods: We analyzed 318 patients with gallbladder stones treated between January 2022 and May 2024. Of these, 152 underwent LCBDE+LC, and 166 underwent ERCP/EST+LC. We compared patients' baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and short-term complications between the two groups. The primary outcome was the effectiveness of choledochal stone removal, while secondary outcomes included length of stay, hospitalization costs, and patient satisfaction. Results: Patients' baseline characteristics were similar between the LCBDE+LC and ERCP/EST+LC groups. Stone clearance rates were comparable (97.37% versus 95.18%, P = .306), with a slight advantage in the LCBDE+LC group. The length of hospitalization was significantly shorter in the LCBDE+LC group (6.49 ± 1.18 days versus 6.77 ± 1.11 days, P < .05). The LCBDE+LC group also had lower total hospitalization costs ($5188.78 ± 861.26 versus $6498.76 ± 1190.58 P < .01). Additionally, the incidence of pancreatitis was lower in the LCBDE+LC group (0.66% versus 6.02%, P < .01). There were no significant differences between the groups in other short-term complications such as abdominal infection, cholangitis, biliary bleeding, or bile leakage. Postoperative follow-up indicated higher patient satisfaction and acceptance in the LCBDE+LC group (SSQ-8, 85.84 ± 4.31 points versus 81.20 ± 4.54 points, P < .01). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the LCBDE+LC holds promise as a safe and efficacious approach for the management of cholelithiasis combined with common bile duct stones. However, further prospective clinical trials are essential to corroborate these results and confirm their broader applicability.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques (JLAST) is the leading international peer-reviewed journal for practicing surgeons who want to keep up with the latest thinking and advanced surgical technologies in laparoscopy, endoscopy, NOTES, and robotics. The Journal is ideally suited to surgeons who are early adopters of new technology and techniques. Recognizing that many new technologies and techniques have significant overlap with several surgical specialties, JLAST is the first journal to focus on these topics both in general and pediatric surgery, and includes other surgical subspecialties such as: urology, gynecologic surgery, thoracic surgery, and more.