Residual cystic duct: An independent risk factor for post-cholecystectomy syndrome, with 287 cases.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Guo-Hui Shao, Zhi-Hong Zhang, Yu-Jie Jiang, Bo Tang, Dong Wei, Jia-Miao Li, Xian-Min Huang, Jia-Hui Chen, Jia-Yun Ge, Ren-Chao Zou
{"title":"Residual cystic duct: An independent risk factor for post-cholecystectomy syndrome, with 287 cases.","authors":"Guo-Hui Shao, Zhi-Hong Zhang, Yu-Jie Jiang, Bo Tang, Dong Wei, Jia-Miao Li, Xian-Min Huang, Jia-Hui Chen, Jia-Yun Ge, Ren-Chao Zou","doi":"10.4103/jmas.jmas_364_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The objective is to investigate the relationship between post-operative cystic syndrome (PCS) and post-operative residual cystic duct.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was performed on 287 patients diagnosed with cholecystolithiasis complicated with cystic inflammation who were admitted to the Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University from August 2017 to September 2021. Residual cystic ducts >10 mm were included in the residual cystic duct group, and 5-10 mm were included in the non-residual cystic duct group. The two groups were compared for differences in cholecystitis, cholecystolithiasis, low confluence common bile duct, cystic duct dilation, duodenal papillary diverticulum, common bile duct calculus and ampullitis, and then, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Moreover, the characteristics of PCS cases in the residual cystic duct group and the non-residual cystic duct group and the differences in VAS pain index and duration of pain at different time points in post-operative follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The incidence of PCS was 21.73% in the residual cystic duct group and 9.23% in the non-residual cystic duct group (P = 0.004). Overall, logistic multivariate analysis of 287 patients showed that cystic duct residue (OR = 2.308, 95% CI = 1.160-4.595, P = 0.017) was an independent risk factor for PCS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Residual cystic duct (residual length of cystic duct >10 mm) is an independent risk factor for PCS. Compared with PCS without residual cystic duct, jaundice and abdominal pain are more serious and have no tendency to relieve. The probability of reoperation is high, which is worthy of attention in clinical diagnosis and treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":48905,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Minimal Access Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Minimal Access Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jmas.jmas_364_23","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The objective is to investigate the relationship between post-operative cystic syndrome (PCS) and post-operative residual cystic duct.

Patients and methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 287 patients diagnosed with cholecystolithiasis complicated with cystic inflammation who were admitted to the Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University from August 2017 to September 2021. Residual cystic ducts >10 mm were included in the residual cystic duct group, and 5-10 mm were included in the non-residual cystic duct group. The two groups were compared for differences in cholecystitis, cholecystolithiasis, low confluence common bile duct, cystic duct dilation, duodenal papillary diverticulum, common bile duct calculus and ampullitis, and then, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Moreover, the characteristics of PCS cases in the residual cystic duct group and the non-residual cystic duct group and the differences in VAS pain index and duration of pain at different time points in post-operative follow-up.

Results: The incidence of PCS was 21.73% in the residual cystic duct group and 9.23% in the non-residual cystic duct group (P = 0.004). Overall, logistic multivariate analysis of 287 patients showed that cystic duct residue (OR = 2.308, 95% CI = 1.160-4.595, P = 0.017) was an independent risk factor for PCS.

Conclusion: Residual cystic duct (residual length of cystic duct >10 mm) is an independent risk factor for PCS. Compared with PCS without residual cystic duct, jaundice and abdominal pain are more serious and have no tendency to relieve. The probability of reoperation is high, which is worthy of attention in clinical diagnosis and treatment.

胆囊管残留:胆囊切除术后综合征的独立危险因素,287例。
前言:目的是探讨术后囊性综合征(PCS)与术后囊管残留的关系。患者与方法:回顾性分析2017年8月至2021年9月昆明医科大学第二附属医院收治的287例胆囊结石合并囊性炎症患者。残余囊管bbb10 mm为残余囊管组,5-10 mm为非残余囊管组。比较两组患者胆囊炎、胆囊结石、低汇合处胆总管、胆囊管扩张、十二指肠乳头状憩室、胆总管结石和壶腹炎的差异,并进行单因素和多因素分析。术后随访中,残余囊管组和非残余囊管组PCS病例的特点及不同时间点VAS疼痛指数和疼痛持续时间的差异。结果:残余囊管组PCS发生率为21.73%,非残余囊管组为9.23% (P = 0.004)。总体而言,287例患者的logistic多因素分析显示,胆囊管残留(OR = 2.308, 95% CI = 1.160 ~ 4.595, P = 0.017)是PCS的独立危险因素。结论:囊管残留(囊管残余长度bbb10mm)是PCS的独立危险因素。与无残余囊管的PCS相比,黄疸和腹痛更严重,且无缓解趋势。再手术概率高,在临床诊断和治疗中值得重视。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
151
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Minimal Access Surgery (JMAS), the official publication of Indian Association of Gastrointestinal Endo Surgeons, launched in early 2005. The JMAS, a quarterly publication, is the first English-language journal from India, as also from this part of the world, dedicated to Minimal Access Surgery. The JMAS boasts an outstanding editorial board comprising of Indian and international experts in the field.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信