• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Biliary tract exploration through a common bile duct incision or left hepatic duct stump in laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy for left side hepatolithiasis: which is better?
【2h】

Biliary tract exploration through a common bile duct incision or left hepatic duct stump in laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy for left side hepatolithiasis: which is better?

机译：腹腔镜左半肝切除术中通过胆总管切开术或左肝管残端胆道探查左侧肝结石：哪个更好？

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy (LLH) followed by biliary tract exploration is used to treat left-sided hepatolithiasis (LSH). The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of 2 methods of biliary tract exploration in LLH:biliary tract exploration through a common bile duct (CBD) incision (with T-tube drainage) or through the left hepatic duct (LHD) stump (without T-tube drainage).LSH patients (113 patients) were recruited retrospectively in our hospital from December 2008 to January 2016. To compare different methods of biliary tract exploration during LLH, the patients were divided into 2 groups: 41 patients underwent biliary tract exploration through the LHD stump (LHD group), and 72 patients underwent biliary tract exploration through a CBD incision (CBD group). Baseline characteristics, surgical outcomes, surgery-related complications, postoperative hospital stay (PHS) and long-term results were compared between the 2 groups.There was no unplanned reoperation in the 2 groups. One patient in the CBD group had a residual stone, which was removed by choledochoscopy 2 months postoperation. Two patients in the LHD group and 3 patients in the CBD group had bile leakage and were cured with abdominal drainage. There were no significant differences in the total operation time, incidence of residual stones and bile leakage between the 2 groups (P > .05). The PHS and the incidence of hypokalemia or hyponatremia in the LHD group were significantly lower than those in the CBD group (P < .05). T-tube-related complications occurred in 13.9% (10/72) of the CBD patients. The mean follow-up period was 37.2 ± 13.8 months. There were no significant differences in the incidence of recurrence stones or cholangitis (P > .05) between the 2 groups.Exploration of the biliary tract through the LHD stump without T-tube drainage is safe with satisfactory short- and long-term results for selected LSH patients.
机译：腹腔镜左半肝切除术（LLH），然后进行胆道探查，可用于治疗左侧肝结石症（LSH）。这项研究的目的是比较LLH的两种胆道探查方法的疗效：通过胆总管（CBD）切口（T型管引流）或通过左肝导管（LHD）残端进行胆道探查（方法：回顾性分析2008年12月至2016年1月在我院收治的LSH患者（113例）。为比较LLH期间不同的胆道探查方法，将患者分为两组：41例行胆道检查LHD树桩（LHD组）进行胆道探查，CBD切口（CBD组）对72例患者进行了胆道探查。比较两组的基线特征，手术结局，手术相关并发症，术后住院时间（PHS）和长期结果，两组均无计划外再次手术。 CBD组的一名患者残余结石，术后2个月通过胆道镜检查将其清除。 LHD组中的2例患者和CBD组中的3例患者出现胆漏，并经腹腔引流治愈。两组的总手术时间，残余结石发生率和胆汁渗漏之间无显着差异（P> .05）。 LHD组的PHS和低钾血症或低钠血症的发生率显着低于CBD组（P <0.05）。 13.9％（10/72）的CBD患者发生T型管相关并发症。平均随访时间为37.2±13.8个月。两组之间的结石或胆管炎复发率无显着差异（P> .05）。通过LHD残端无T管引流探查胆道是安全的，短期和长期结果令人满意选择的LSH患者。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号