腹腔镜胆总管探查与ERCP/支架置入和胆囊切除术:单阶段手术更好吗?

IF 0.2 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Raju Kadam, Dhananjay Saxena, A. Rana, S. Chhabra, Z. Ahmed, Vikesh Vij, Jeevan Kankaria, R. Jenaw
{"title":"腹腔镜胆总管探查与ERCP/支架置入和胆囊切除术:单阶段手术更好吗?","authors":"Raju Kadam, Dhananjay Saxena, A. Rana, S. Chhabra, Z. Ahmed, Vikesh Vij, Jeevan Kankaria, R. Jenaw","doi":"10.5348/IJHPD-2016-55-OA-11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Aims: Choledocholithiasis is most common cause of obstructive jaundice. Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy has evolved as an alternative procedure to ERCP/ stenting in the management of choledocholithiasis. This study was aimed to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic CBD exploration with cholecystectomy (group 1) as compared to the conventional two staged procedure involving ERCP/ stenting (group 2).\n Methods: 60 patients admitted to our department (mean age = 45.52, SD = 17.71, 15 males, 45 females) for the management of choledocholithiasis from April 2014 to October 2015 were included in the study. We reviewed retrospectively the patients' data including age, sex, duration of the surgery, intra-operative and postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, mortality and condition on follow-up.\n Results: Group 1 included 30 patients (mean age 50.76, 21 females, 9 males). The average operative time in this group was 110 minutes (96–145), stone clearance rate was 100%, and average hospital stay was 3.2 days (2–9). Group 2 also included 30 patients (mean age 44.36, 24 females, 6 males) with stone clearance rate of 70% (21 out of 30), average operative time 120.7 minutes (90–167), average hospital stay 9.1 (3–30) days and an average of 2.3 procedures per patient.\n Conclusion: In our study mean operative time, stone clearance rate, average hospital stay and average number of procedures per patient were found to be significantly lower in laparoscopic CBD exploration group. It can be concluded that laparoscopic CBD exploration with cholecystectomy is much safer and cost effective than the conventional two staged procedure involving ERCP/ stenting. \n \n","PeriodicalId":40532,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Diseases","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration versus ERCP/stenting and cholecystectomy: Is a single staged procedure better?\",\"authors\":\"Raju Kadam, Dhananjay Saxena, A. Rana, S. Chhabra, Z. Ahmed, Vikesh Vij, Jeevan Kankaria, R. Jenaw\",\"doi\":\"10.5348/IJHPD-2016-55-OA-11\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n Aims: Choledocholithiasis is most common cause of obstructive jaundice. Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy has evolved as an alternative procedure to ERCP/ stenting in the management of choledocholithiasis. This study was aimed to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic CBD exploration with cholecystectomy (group 1) as compared to the conventional two staged procedure involving ERCP/ stenting (group 2).\\n Methods: 60 patients admitted to our department (mean age = 45.52, SD = 17.71, 15 males, 45 females) for the management of choledocholithiasis from April 2014 to October 2015 were included in the study. We reviewed retrospectively the patients' data including age, sex, duration of the surgery, intra-operative and postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, mortality and condition on follow-up.\\n Results: Group 1 included 30 patients (mean age 50.76, 21 females, 9 males). The average operative time in this group was 110 minutes (96–145), stone clearance rate was 100%, and average hospital stay was 3.2 days (2–9). Group 2 also included 30 patients (mean age 44.36, 24 females, 6 males) with stone clearance rate of 70% (21 out of 30), average operative time 120.7 minutes (90–167), average hospital stay 9.1 (3–30) days and an average of 2.3 procedures per patient.\\n Conclusion: In our study mean operative time, stone clearance rate, average hospital stay and average number of procedures per patient were found to be significantly lower in laparoscopic CBD exploration group. It can be concluded that laparoscopic CBD exploration with cholecystectomy is much safer and cost effective than the conventional two staged procedure involving ERCP/ stenting. \\n \\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":40532,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Diseases\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5348/IJHPD-2016-55-OA-11\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5348/IJHPD-2016-55-OA-11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

目的:胆总管结石是梗阻性黄疸最常见的病因。腹腔镜胆总管取石术已经发展成为一种替代ERCP/支架置入治疗胆总管结石的方法。本研究旨在比较腹腔镜下CBD探查加胆囊切除术(组1)与常规两阶段手术包括ERCP/支架植入术(组2)的疗效。方法:选取2014年4月至2015年10月在我科收治的60例胆管结石患者(平均年龄45.52岁,SD = 17.71,男性15例,女性45例)。我们回顾了患者的资料,包括年龄、性别、手术时间、术中和术后并发症、住院时间、死亡率和随访情况。结果:第一组患者30例,平均年龄50.76岁,女性21例,男性9例。本组平均手术时间110分钟(96 ~ 145),结石清除率100%,平均住院时间3.2天(2 ~ 9)。第二组患者30例,平均年龄44.36岁,女性24例,男性6例,结石清除率70%(21 / 30),平均手术时间120.7分钟(90-167),平均住院时间9.1天(3-30),平均2.3例。结论:本研究发现,腹腔镜下CBD探查组的平均手术时间、结石清除率、平均住院时间和平均手术次数均显著低于对照组。由此可见,腹腔镜下CBD探查联合胆囊切除术比传统的两阶段ERCP/支架置入术更安全、更经济。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration versus ERCP/stenting and cholecystectomy: Is a single staged procedure better?
Aims: Choledocholithiasis is most common cause of obstructive jaundice. Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy has evolved as an alternative procedure to ERCP/ stenting in the management of choledocholithiasis. This study was aimed to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic CBD exploration with cholecystectomy (group 1) as compared to the conventional two staged procedure involving ERCP/ stenting (group 2). Methods: 60 patients admitted to our department (mean age = 45.52, SD = 17.71, 15 males, 45 females) for the management of choledocholithiasis from April 2014 to October 2015 were included in the study. We reviewed retrospectively the patients' data including age, sex, duration of the surgery, intra-operative and postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, mortality and condition on follow-up. Results: Group 1 included 30 patients (mean age 50.76, 21 females, 9 males). The average operative time in this group was 110 minutes (96–145), stone clearance rate was 100%, and average hospital stay was 3.2 days (2–9). Group 2 also included 30 patients (mean age 44.36, 24 females, 6 males) with stone clearance rate of 70% (21 out of 30), average operative time 120.7 minutes (90–167), average hospital stay 9.1 (3–30) days and an average of 2.3 procedures per patient. Conclusion: In our study mean operative time, stone clearance rate, average hospital stay and average number of procedures per patient were found to be significantly lower in laparoscopic CBD exploration group. It can be concluded that laparoscopic CBD exploration with cholecystectomy is much safer and cost effective than the conventional two staged procedure involving ERCP/ stenting.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信