Ping Chen, Bingzhong Su, Chunli Cong, Hongxia Wang, Tong-ling Zhang, Jianjun Ren, Qi Wang, Xudong Liu
{"title":"胆囊-胆总管结石不同治疗方案的临床分析","authors":"Ping Chen, Bingzhong Su, Chunli Cong, Hongxia Wang, Tong-ling Zhang, Jianjun Ren, Qi Wang, Xudong Liu","doi":"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.0254-1432.2019.01.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective \nTo evaluate the efficacy of different treatment options for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis (CCL), and try to find the ideal treatment. \n \n \nMethods \nFrom January 2006 to January 2016, a total of 3 107 patients with CCL from the Affiliated Hospital of Inner Mongolia Medical University were enrolled. Among them, 1 283 patients were in open cholecystectomy (OC) and open common bile duct exploration (OCBDE) group, 964 patients were in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) group, and 860 patients were in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)+ LC group. The clinical data of the three groups were analysed. One-way analysis of variance and chi-square test were performed for statistical analysis. \n \n \nResults \nFrom 2006 to 2010, the percentage of patients treated with OC+ OCBDE, LC+ LCBDE, and ERCP+ LC were 56.05%(829/1 479), 25.15%(372/1 479) and 18.80%(278/1 479), respectively; from 2011 to 2016, the percentage of patients received the above three treatments were 27.89%(454/1 628), 36.36%(592/1 628) and 35.75%(582/1 628), respectively. The difference in the proportion of the same treatment at different times was statistically significant (χ2=4.775, 4.168 and 0.669, all P 0.05). The hospital stay of the OC+ OCBDE group, the LC+ LCBDE group and the ERCP+ LC group were (6.7±1.3) days, (5.6±1.2) days and (10.9±1.6) days, respectively, and the differences were statistically significant (F=90.010, P<0.01). The hospitalization expenses of OC+ OCBDE group, LC+ LCBDE group and ERCP+ LC group were (13 720±1 910) yuan, (18 150±1 490) yuan and (25 830±2 430) yuan, respectively, and the differences were statistically significant (F=302.991, P<0.01). \n \n \nConclusion \nThe first choice of patients with CCL is endoscopic minimally invasive treatment and open surgery can be used as a remedial method for endoscopic treatment. \n \n \nKey words: \nCholecysto-choledocholithiasis; Endoscopic minimally invasive treatment; Open surgery","PeriodicalId":10009,"journal":{"name":"中华消化杂志","volume":"79 1","pages":"40-44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical analysis of different treatment options for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis\",\"authors\":\"Ping Chen, Bingzhong Su, Chunli Cong, Hongxia Wang, Tong-ling Zhang, Jianjun Ren, Qi Wang, Xudong Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.0254-1432.2019.01.009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective \\nTo evaluate the efficacy of different treatment options for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis (CCL), and try to find the ideal treatment. \\n \\n \\nMethods \\nFrom January 2006 to January 2016, a total of 3 107 patients with CCL from the Affiliated Hospital of Inner Mongolia Medical University were enrolled. Among them, 1 283 patients were in open cholecystectomy (OC) and open common bile duct exploration (OCBDE) group, 964 patients were in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) group, and 860 patients were in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)+ LC group. The clinical data of the three groups were analysed. One-way analysis of variance and chi-square test were performed for statistical analysis. \\n \\n \\nResults \\nFrom 2006 to 2010, the percentage of patients treated with OC+ OCBDE, LC+ LCBDE, and ERCP+ LC were 56.05%(829/1 479), 25.15%(372/1 479) and 18.80%(278/1 479), respectively; from 2011 to 2016, the percentage of patients received the above three treatments were 27.89%(454/1 628), 36.36%(592/1 628) and 35.75%(582/1 628), respectively. The difference in the proportion of the same treatment at different times was statistically significant (χ2=4.775, 4.168 and 0.669, all P 0.05). The hospital stay of the OC+ OCBDE group, the LC+ LCBDE group and the ERCP+ LC group were (6.7±1.3) days, (5.6±1.2) days and (10.9±1.6) days, respectively, and the differences were statistically significant (F=90.010, P<0.01). The hospitalization expenses of OC+ OCBDE group, LC+ LCBDE group and ERCP+ LC group were (13 720±1 910) yuan, (18 150±1 490) yuan and (25 830±2 430) yuan, respectively, and the differences were statistically significant (F=302.991, P<0.01). \\n \\n \\nConclusion \\nThe first choice of patients with CCL is endoscopic minimally invasive treatment and open surgery can be used as a remedial method for endoscopic treatment. \\n \\n \\nKey words: \\nCholecysto-choledocholithiasis; Endoscopic minimally invasive treatment; Open surgery\",\"PeriodicalId\":10009,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"中华消化杂志\",\"volume\":\"79 1\",\"pages\":\"40-44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"中华消化杂志\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.0254-1432.2019.01.009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中华消化杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.0254-1432.2019.01.009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Clinical analysis of different treatment options for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis
Objective
To evaluate the efficacy of different treatment options for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis (CCL), and try to find the ideal treatment.
Methods
From January 2006 to January 2016, a total of 3 107 patients with CCL from the Affiliated Hospital of Inner Mongolia Medical University were enrolled. Among them, 1 283 patients were in open cholecystectomy (OC) and open common bile duct exploration (OCBDE) group, 964 patients were in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) group, and 860 patients were in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)+ LC group. The clinical data of the three groups were analysed. One-way analysis of variance and chi-square test were performed for statistical analysis.
Results
From 2006 to 2010, the percentage of patients treated with OC+ OCBDE, LC+ LCBDE, and ERCP+ LC were 56.05%(829/1 479), 25.15%(372/1 479) and 18.80%(278/1 479), respectively; from 2011 to 2016, the percentage of patients received the above three treatments were 27.89%(454/1 628), 36.36%(592/1 628) and 35.75%(582/1 628), respectively. The difference in the proportion of the same treatment at different times was statistically significant (χ2=4.775, 4.168 and 0.669, all P 0.05). The hospital stay of the OC+ OCBDE group, the LC+ LCBDE group and the ERCP+ LC group were (6.7±1.3) days, (5.6±1.2) days and (10.9±1.6) days, respectively, and the differences were statistically significant (F=90.010, P<0.01). The hospitalization expenses of OC+ OCBDE group, LC+ LCBDE group and ERCP+ LC group were (13 720±1 910) yuan, (18 150±1 490) yuan and (25 830±2 430) yuan, respectively, and the differences were statistically significant (F=302.991, P<0.01).
Conclusion
The first choice of patients with CCL is endoscopic minimally invasive treatment and open surgery can be used as a remedial method for endoscopic treatment.
Key words:
Cholecysto-choledocholithiasis; Endoscopic minimally invasive treatment; Open surgery
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
