切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华普通外科学文献(电子版) ›› 2023, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (04) : 262 -266. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0793.2023.04.005

论著

胆囊切除术后胆管损伤不同治疗方式的疗效分析
古丽米拉·亚森江, 阿依努尔·艾尔肯, 李佳隆, 郭强, 蒋铁民, 吐尔干艾力·阿吉()   
  1. 830054 乌鲁木齐,省部共建中亚高发病成因与防治国家重点实验室 新疆医科大学第一附属医院消化血管外科中心肝胆包虫病外科
  • 收稿日期:2023-02-06 出版日期:2023-08-01
  • 通信作者: 吐尔干艾力·阿吉
  • 基金资助:
    省部共建中亚高发病成因与防治国家重点实验室项目(SKL-HIDCA-2021-4)

Analysis of different treatment methods for bile duct injury after cholecystectomy

Yasenjiang Gulimila, Aierken Ayinuer, Jialong Li, Qiang Guo, Tiemin Jiang, Aji Tuerganaili()   

  1. Department of Hepatobiliary Hydatidosis, Digestive Vascular Surgery Center, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, State Key Laboratory of Pathogenesis, Prevention and Treatment of High Incidence Diseases in Central Asia,Urumqi 830054, China
  • Received:2023-02-06 Published:2023-08-01
  • Corresponding author: Aji Tuerganaili
引用本文:

古丽米拉·亚森江, 阿依努尔·艾尔肯, 李佳隆, 郭强, 蒋铁民, 吐尔干艾力·阿吉. 胆囊切除术后胆管损伤不同治疗方式的疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 262-266.

Yasenjiang Gulimila, Aierken Ayinuer, Jialong Li, Qiang Guo, Tiemin Jiang, Aji Tuerganaili. Analysis of different treatment methods for bile duct injury after cholecystectomy[J/OL]. Chinese Archives of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(04): 262-266.

目的

探究不同治疗方式在同一分型医源性胆管损伤(IBDI)中的临床疗效。

方法

回顾性分析2017年10月至2022年2月新疆医科大学第一附属医院收治Ⅱ1型IBDI型患者34例临床资料,按治疗方式不同分为内镜组(13例)和外科手术组(21例)。比较两组患者住院天数、住院费用、手术前后实验室检查指标、术中出血量、手术时间、术后并发症及出院后随访情况。

结果

内镜组术后第1天总胆红素、直接胆红素水平均低于外科手术组,手术时间、术中出血量、住院天数及住院费用均少于外科手术组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组修复时机比较差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.095,P>0.05)。患者随访时间33.2(6.4~67.7)个月,随访有效率97.1%。近期并发症中Clavien-Dindo≥Ⅲ级9例,均为外科手术组患者。随访效果Terblanche评级:内镜组中优9例,良3例,差1例;外科手术组中优16例,良3例,差2例。两组远期疗效比较,差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.051,P>0.05)。

结论

Ⅱ1型IBDI的治疗方法应根据损伤具体情况来决定。内镜治疗具有微创、手术时间短、术后恢复快等优势,但长期多次更换支架增加了治疗费用、住院次数和并发症可能。而在术中即时发现胆管的横断伤及伴有血管损伤时,外科手术治疗仍作为首选。

Objective

To explore the clinical efficacy of different treatment methods for the same classification of iatrogenic bile duct injury (IBDI).

Methods

A retrospective analysis was carried out including the clinical data of 34 patients with Ⅱ 1 type IBDI admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University from October 2017 to February 2022. The patients were divided into the endoscopic group (13 cases) and the surgical group (21 cases) according to different treatment methods. The hospitalization days, hospitalization expenses, laboratory examination indicators before and after surgery, intraoperative bleeding, operation time, postoperative complications, and follow-up after discharge were compared between the two groups.

Results

The total bilirubin and direct bilirubin levels in the endoscopic group on the first day after surgery were lower than those in the surgical group, and the operation time, intraoperative bleeding, hospitalization days, and hospitalization expenses were lower than those in the surgical group, with statistically significant differences (all P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in repair timing between the two groups (χ2=0.095, P>0.05). The patients were followed up for 33.2 (6.4-67.7) months, with a follow-up effective rate of 97.1%. Among the short-term complications, 9 patients with Clavien-Dindo≥Ⅲ were in the surgical group. Follow-up effect Terblanche rating: in the endoscopic group, 9 cases were excellent, 3 cases were good, and 1 case was poor; in the surgical group, 16 cases were excellent, 3 cases were good, and 2 cases were poor. There was no statistically significant difference in long-term efficacy between the two groups (χ2=0.051, P>0.05).

Conclusions

The treatment of Ⅱ 1 type IBDI may be determined based on the specific situation of the injury. Endoscopic therapy has the advantages of minimally invasive surgery, short operation time, and rapid postoperative recovery. However, long-term and repeated stent replacement increases treatment costs, hospital stays, and complications. Surgical treatment is still the first choice when bile duct transection and vascular injury are immediately detected during IBDI surgery.

图1 一例医源性胆总管损伤患者内镜治疗前核磁共振及ERCP影像 A、B为术前核磁,箭头所示为胆漏处;C为ERCP术中可见造影剂外溢(箭头所示)
图2 一例医源性胆管损伤患者术前核磁共振及胆管对端吻合术 箭头所示胆总管中段未显影(A);术中切除胆总管中段狭窄处,箭头所示可见结扎缝线(B)、箭头所示为切除狭窄段后行胆管对端吻合(C)
表1 两组医源性胆管损伤患者一般资料比较
表2 两组医源性胆管损伤患者肝功能指标水平比较(μmol/L,±s)
表3 两组医源性胆管损伤患者围手术期相关指标比较(±s)
[1]
中华医学会外科学分会胆道外科学组. 胆管损伤的诊断和治疗指南(2013版)[J]. 中华消化外科杂志, 2013, 12(2): 81-95.
[2]
Pucher PH, Brunt LM, Davies N, et al. Outcome trends and safety measures after 30 years of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A systematic review and pooled data analysis[J]. Surg Endosc, 2018, 32(5): 2175-2183.
[3]
Terblanche J, Worthley CS, Spence RA, et al. High or low hepaticojejunostomy for bile duct strictures?[J]. Surgery, 1990, 108(5): 828-834.
[4]
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6 336 patients and results of a survey[J]. Ann Surg, 2004, 240(2): 205-213.
[5]
Thomson BN, Parks RW, Madhavan KK, et al. Early specialist repair of biliary injury[J]. Br J Surg, 2006, 93(2): 216-220.
[6]
吕少诚, 贺强, 郎韧, 等. 医源性胆管损伤外科治疗策略及疗效[J/CD]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志2021, 10(2): 181-185.
[7]
Kambakamba P, Cremen S, Möckli B, et al. Timing of surgical repair of bile duct injuries after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A systematic review[J]. World J Hepatol, 2022, 14(2): 442-455.
[8]
Eum YO, Park JK, Chun J, et al. Non-surgical treatment of post-surgical bile duct injury: clinical implications and outcomes[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2014, 20(22): 6924-6931.
[1] 陈浩, 王萌. 胃印戒细胞癌的临床病理特征及治疗选择的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 108-111.
[2] 王兴, 文阳辉, 姚戈冰, 郭平学, 杨自华. ICG荧光腹腔镜下胆囊切除术的临床应用[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 663-666.
[3] 康婵娟, 张海涛, 翟静洁. 胰管支架置入术治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎的效果及对患者肝功能、炎症因子水平的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 667-670.
[4] 刘柏隆. 女性压力性尿失禁阶梯治疗之手术治疗方案选择[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 126-126.
[5] 仝聪, 周哲琦, 阎立昆. 食管裂孔疝合并胃食管反流病治疗现状及与胃食管结合部肿瘤的关系[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 491-493.
[6] 蒋凤茹, 朱熠林. 双腔造瘘口旁疝诊疗经验[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 534-537.
[7] 中国研究型医院学会微创外科学专业委员会. 单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术中国专家共识(2024版)[J/OL]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(04): 193-198.
[8] 翁桂湖, 刘悦泽, 张太平. 胰腺神经内分泌肿瘤治疗进展与争议[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 602-606.
[9] 邱小原, 刘雨馨, 李珂璇, 林国乐, 邱辉忠, 安燚. 直肠肿瘤术后直肠阴道瘘的外科治疗[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 423-430.
[10] 曹文钰, 郭鹏, 李锦平. 微创手术及非手术方式治疗慢性硬膜下血肿的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2024, 10(05): 304-309.
[11] 李晓东, 李昂, 马龙, 刘亮, 魏云, 王汉宇. 基底动脉顶端动脉瘤显微手术治疗[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2024, 10(04): 254-256.
[12] 梁艳娉, 陈燕柔, 梁运啸, 白飞虎, 吴斌, 王省. 华南地区门静脉高压食管胃静脉曲张出血内镜治疗现状调研分析[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(05): 390-395.
[13] 刘燚隆, 党荣广, 艾蓉, 张凯. 肝硬化合并静脉曲张出血患者内镜治疗后再出血风险的模型建立与验证[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(04): 336-342.
[14] 代剑华, 覃语思, 陈磊, 彭志红, 陈瑶, 刘俐, 吴宏博, 许森林, 李川, 钱锋, 彭贵勇. 术前评估超内镜治疗适应证胃癌的超级微创新选择:内镜、腔镜序贯治疗[J/OL]. 中华胃肠内镜电子杂志, 2024, 11(04): 217-224.
[15] 马梓粼, 张帅, 何占娣, 王娟, 孙国辉, 黄昂, 杨竞, 钟立森, 张晓彬, 刘迎娣, 令狐恩强. 改良的内镜下静脉曲张套扎术治疗肝硬化食管静脉曲张的疗效研究[J/OL]. 中华胃肠内镜电子杂志, 2024, 11(04): 225-232.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?