west china medical publishers
Keyword
  • Title
  • Author
  • Keyword
  • Abstract
Advance search
Advance search

Search

find Keyword "一期缝合" 14 results
  • Efficacy analysis of primary closure with two or three endoscopes through cystic duct for treatment of gallbladder stone with secondary common bile duct stones

    ObjectiveTo investigate clinical efficacy and advantages and disadvantages of primary closure with two endoscopes (1aparoscope+choledochoscope) or three endoscopes (laparoscope+choledochoscope+duodenoscope) through the cystic duct for treatment of gallbladder stone with secondary common bile duct (CBD) stones.MethodsThe clinical data of 83 patients with gallbladder stones with secondary CBD stones treated by two or three endoscopes combined with CBD exploration and lithotomy and primary closure through cystic duct from January 2017 to December 2018 in the Chengdu Second People’s Hospital were collected retrospectively. Among them, 41 patients were treated by two endoscopes mode (two endoscopes group), 42 cases were treated by three endoscopes mode (three endoscopes group).ResultsThere were no significant differences in the general conditions such as the gender, age, preoperative diameter of CBD, chronic diseases, etc. between the two and three endoscopes group (P>0.05). All 83 cases underwent the operations successfully and recovered well. The success rate of operation, stone clearance rate, drainage volume of abdominal drainage tube on day 1 after the operation, time of abdominal drainage tube removal after the operation, and hospitalization time had no significant differences between these two groups (P>0.05). The time of operation, intraoperative bleeding volume, and the postoperative pancreatitis rate in the three endoscopes group were significantly more (or higher) than those in the two endoscopes group (P<0.05), but the condition of liver function recovered after the operation was better than that in the two endoscopes group (P<0.05).ConclusionsWith the strict control of the operation indications, it is safe and feasible to use two or three endoscopes through the cystic duct pathway and primary closure of CBD for treatment of gallbladder stone with secondary CBD stones. However, the choice of operative methods of two or three endoscopes should be based on the general situation of the patients before and during the operation.

    Release date:2020-07-26 02:35 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Primary Suture versus T-tube Drainage after Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Stone Exploration: A Systematic Review

    Objective To assess the benefits and harms of routine primary suture (LBEPS) versus T-tube drainage (LCHTD) following laparoscopic common bile duct stone exploration. Methods The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs were electronically searched from the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2010), PubMed (1978 to 2010), EMbase (1966 to 2010), CBMdisc (1978 to 2010), and CNKI (1979 to 2010); and the relevant published and unpublished data and their references were also searched by hand. The data were extracted and the quality was evaluated by two reviewers independently, and the RevMan 5.0 software was used for data analysis. Results Four studies including 3 RCTs and 1 quasi-RCT involving 274 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed that compared with LCHTD, LBEPS was better in shortening operation time (WMD= –17.11, 95%CI –25.86 to –8.36), abdominal drainage time (WMD= –0.74, 95%CI –1.39 to –0.10) and post-operative hospitalization time (WMD= –3.30, 95%CI –3.67 to –2.92), in lowering hospital expenses (WMD= –2 998.75, 95%CI –4 396.24 to –1 601.26) and in reducing the complications due to T-tube such as tube detaching, bile leakage after tube drawing, and choleperitonitis (RR=0.56, 95%CI 0.29 to 1.09). Conclusion LBEPS is superior to LCHTD in total effectiveness for common bile duct stone with the precondition of strictly abiding by operation indication. Due to the low quality of the included studies which decreases the reliability of this conclusion, more reasonably-designed and strictly-performed multi-centered RCTs with large scale and longer follow up time are required to further assess and verify the efficacy and safety of this treatment.

    Release date:2016-09-07 11:01 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Effect of Primary Closure Versus T-Tube Drainage after Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration

    目的比较腹腔镜下胆总管探查一期缝合与T管引流治疗肝外胆管结石的效果,总结腹腔镜下胆总管探查一期缝合的临床经验。 方法回顾性分析2010年1月至2012年12月期间于中国人民解放军总医院施行腹腔镜下胆总管探查取石的121例肝外胆管结石患者的临床资料,比较一期缝合组(n=63)与T管引流组(n=58)的手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间、胆瘘发生率、胆总管狭窄发生率及结石复发率。 结果2组患者均顺利完成腹腔镜手术。术后一期缝合组发生胆瘘3例,T管引流组发生1例。2组患者的术中出血量和胆瘘发生率比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),但T管引流组的手术时间和术后住院时间均较长(P=0.000)。术后所有患者获访4~36个月,平均12个月。随访期间均无复发、胆总管狭窄及死亡发生。 结论腹腔镜下胆总管探查一期缝合治疗肝外胆管结石安全而有效,并且避免了术后T管的护理,有望成为处理肝外胆管结石的主流术式。

    Release date: Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • 腹腔镜胆总管探查术后胆总管一期缝合与T管引流的疗效观察

    目的比较腹腔镜胆总管探查术后胆总管一期缝合与T管引流对临床治疗胆总管结石患者的影响 方法将2012年4月至2015年12月期间笔者所在医院收治的胆总管结石拟行腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术的90例患者作为研究对象,按随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组,数字为偶数者为观察组,奇数者为对照组,每组45例。观察组进行胆总管一期缝合,对照组行T管引流,记录并比较2组患者的手术情况及术后恢复情况,并对2组术后并发症的发生情况进行比较。 结果观察组手术时间明显短于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),2组术中出血量比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组患者术后肛门排气时间、下床活动时间、住院时间及恢复工作时间均明显短于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);此外观察组住院费用亦明显少于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);观察组患者术后并发症的发生率明显低于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。 结论在严格掌握相关适应证的前提下,采用腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合临床效果显著,具有手术时间短、术后恢复快、安全性高的优势,值得在临床推广使用。

    Release date: Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • 腹腔镜胆总管探查术后一期缝合与T管引流的临床研究

    目的探讨腹腔镜胆总管探查术后一期缝合与T管引流的手术疗效。 方法回顾性分析2012年1月至2013年12月期间太仓市第一人民医院肝胆外科行腹腔镜胆总管探查术50例患者的临床资料,其中18例行胆总管一期缝合,32例行胆总管T管引流,分析2组患者的临床疗效。 结果50例患者无中转开腹,均治愈出院。缝合组及引流组平均胆总管直径分别为(10.6±1.5)mm及(11.3±1.5)mm,胆总管结石数分别为(3.0±2.0)枚及(3.2±2.2)枚,平均结石直径分别为(5.5±1.6)mm及(5.8±2.1)mm,其差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。缝合组和引流组手术时间分别为(107.9±20.3)min和(101.6±36.4)min,分别于手术后(3.8±1.0)d和(3.3±1.0)d拔除腹腔引流管,总住院时间分别为(11.6±3.1)d和(12.0±2.2)d,术后恢复时间分别为(8.9±0.9)d和(7.4±1.1)d,其差异也无统计学意义(P>0.05)。缝合组和引流组患者住院总费用分别为(14 525.1±2 274.6)元和(16 568.3±2 701.5)元,缝合组住院总费用低于引流组(P<0.05)。引流组术后有结石残留1例,发生胆汁漏1例;缝合组无并发症发生。 结论与T管引流相比,腹腔镜胆管探查术后一期缝合不增加手术时间、总住院时间、术后恢复时间及术后引流时间,而能减少住院总费用,在合适的病例中,腹腔镜下胆总管探查术后一期缝合安全有效。

    Release date: Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • 自制负压冲洗引流装置治疗高压注射伤

    目的总结自制负压冲洗引流装置治疗高压注射伤的疗效。 方法2008年8月-2012年11月,收治高压注射伤15例。男12例,女3例;年龄22~45岁,平均40岁。损伤部位:手指8例,手掌5例,腕背侧2例。损伤部位均存在1个小注入口,局部组织红肿热痛。受伤至入院时间1 h~1周,平均4 h。入院后均一期清创后直接缝合,采用自制负压冲洗引流装置持续负压引流、每日冲洗,持续1周。 结果术后腕背侧创面均Ⅰ期愈合;手指创面5例Ⅰ期愈合,3例愈合不良,经换药后愈合;手掌创面均愈合不良,其中3例经换药后愈合,2例发生皮肤坏死,行二期皮瓣移植修复后愈合。术后患者均获随访,随访时间3个月~2年,平均6个月。末次随访时根据手部总主动活动度(TAM)评价法评定手部功能,获优10例,良5例。 结论对于高压注射伤,彻底清创后应用自制负压冲洗引流装置可及时将坏死渗出物引出,一期闭合创面,获得较好疗效。

    Release date:2016-08-31 04:07 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Analysis of Effect and Quality of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy with Common Bile Duct Exploration,Built-in-Tube Drainage, and Primary Suture

    ObjectiveTo compare and evaluate the effect and quality of T-tube drainage and bulit-in-tube drainage plus primary suture after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). MethodsA clinical trial was taken in 79 cases with T-tube drainage (control group) and 62 cases with built-in-tube drainage (observation group). The treatment success rate, incidence of complications, bilirubin recovered time, length of stay, recuperation time, and treatment cost were measured and compared between the two groups. ResultsThere were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in treatment success rate, incidences of complications, and bilirubin recovered time of patients (Pgt;0.05), while length of stay, recuperation time, and treatment cost of patients in observation group were significantly less than those in control group (Plt;0.05). ConclusionsBuilt-in-tube drainage plus primary suture after LC and common bile duct exploration could achieve the same therapeutic effect as the traditional T-tube drainage with less length of stay, recuperation time, and treatment cost.

    Release date:2016-09-08 10:41 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Laparoscopy Combined with Choledochoscopy for Common Bile Duct Stone (Report of 523 Cases)

    Objective To investigate the effect of laparoscopy combined with choledochoscopy on common bile duct (CBD) stones with primary suture of the CBD. Methods Totally 523 patients of gallbladder stone companied with CBD stones or choledochectasia (diameter ≥0.8 cm) from September 1998 to December 2008 were retrospectively analyzed. Results The primary suture of the CBD incision was successfully performed in 487 patients. The CBD stones were completely removed during the operation in 400 patients. Nothing was found in 87 cases. In 10 cases conversion to open surgery were performed and in 26 cases the T tube drainage was put into the CBD in choledocholithotomy. Average operative time was 90 min and average bleeding volume was 50 ml. All patients took food at 24 h, returned general activity on 2-3 d and discharged on 5 d after operation. Postoperative biliary leakage occurred in 29 cases with drainage average volume of 35 ml/d and continued 1-6 d, which were cured by non-operation therapy. Conclusions The primary suture of the CBD during the laparosocopy combined with choledochosopy in choledocholithotomy is a safe and effective operation with less invasion, less pain and quicker recovery. CBD incision suture without T tube drainage can be done when CBD stones are cleared completely and no stenosis is found in extrahepatic bile duct.

    Release date:2016-09-08 11:05 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Feasibility Through Confluence of Common Bile Duct and Cystic Duct Approach with Mini-Incision in LaparoscopicCommon Bile Duct Exploration

    Objective To investigate the feasibility and patient selection of T-tube free laparoscopic common bileduct exploration through mini-incision in confluence of common bile duct (CBD) and cystic duct. Methods The clinical data of 52 patients who underwent CBD exploration from January 2009 to December 2011 were retrospectively analyzed. A 3-4mm longitudinal incision of anterior wall of CBD was made along the confluence of CBD and cystic duct, and then the choledochoscope was inserted into CBD through this mini-incision for the exploration and treatment by laparoscopy and choledochoscopy, the incision was sewed up by T-tube free primary suture. Results All 52 cases were cured and stone clearance rate was 100% as revealed by choledochoscopy and cholangiography. The time of operation, intraoperativecholangiography, removal of stones with help of choledochoscope, and removal drainage tube after operation was from 90 to 200 min with an average of 100min, 3 to 10min with an average of 6min, 5 to 15 min with an average of 8 min,and 3-5d with an average of 3.5d , respectively. The drainage flow was 20-60mL/d with an average of 30mL/d. No biliary leakage, abdominal pain, and choloplania or infection of incision was observed following operation. The hospital stay was 5 to 12d with an average of 6.5d after operation. No calculus regeneration or bile duct stricture occurred during following-up of 3 to 40 months with an average of 20 months. Conclusion With proper patient selection, T-tube free laparoscopic CBD exploration through mini-incision in confluence of CBD and cystic duct is safe and feasible by proficient surgeons in laparoscopy and choledochoscopy.

    Release date:2016-09-08 10:23 Export PDF Favorites Scan
  • Primary closureversus T-tube drainage in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: a meta-analysis

    Objective To evaluate the safety and efficacy of primary closure (PC) and T-tube drainage (TD) after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Methods The randomized controlled trials of PC and TD after LCBDE were retrieved from the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until April 2015. All calculations and statistical tests were performed using ReviewerManager 5.2 software. Results Both of the two groups had no postoperative deaths within 30 days. The operative time and hospital stay of PC gourp were shorter than TD group statistically〔OR=–24.76, 95CI (–29.21, –20.31),P<0.000 01〕and〔OR=–2.68, 95%CI (–3.69, –1.67),P<0.000 01〕. The reoperative rate of PC group was lower than that of TD group, and the difference was statistically significant〔OR=0.20, 95%CI (0.05, 0.81),P=0.02〕. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the occurrence of postoperative severe complications〔OR=0.54, 95%CI (0.26, 1.12),P=0.10〕. Conclusions Compared with the TD group, the operative time and hospitalization time are shorer in PC group, and complication rate is similar, but the cost of treatment of the TD group is higher than PC group, so after LCBDE a primary closure of common bile duct is safe and effective method.

    Release date:2017-04-18 03:08 Export PDF Favorites Scan
2 pages Previous 1 2 Next

Format

Content