中外医疗
中外醫療
중외의료
CHINA FOREIGN MEDICAL TREATMENT
2015年
17期
48-49
,共2页
腹腔镜胆道探查术%胆总管结石%效果研究
腹腔鏡膽道探查術%膽總管結石%效果研究
복강경담도탐사술%담총관결석%효과연구
Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration%Choledocholithiasis%Study on the Effect
目的：探讨对比经胆囊管腹腔镜胆道探查术与经胆总管切开T管引流手术治疗胆总管结石的临床效果。方法随机选取2013年7月-2014年6月该院收治的60例胆石症患者为研究对象，按照手术方法的不同将其分为观察组30例与对照组30例；给予观察组经胆囊管腹腔镜胆道探查术治疗，给予对照组经胆总管切开T管引流手术治疗。术后对比分析两组患者的手术时间、引流时间、术后排气时间、住院时间以及并发症发生情况等。结果观察组手术时间、引流时间、术后排气时间、住院时间均明显低于对照组；且两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。观察组并发症总发生率为4.0%，对照组并发症总发生率为28.0%，同时观察组的胆漏、急性胰腺炎、急性胆汁腹膜炎、肝下积液感染、引流不畅等并发症的发生率显著小于对照组，两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论使用胆囊管腹腔镜胆道探查术治疗胆总管结石症的效果优于胆总管切开T管引流手术，且该手术方法术后并发症发生率要低于胆总管切开T管引流手术，因此该方法值得临床推广应用。
目的：探討對比經膽囊管腹腔鏡膽道探查術與經膽總管切開T管引流手術治療膽總管結石的臨床效果。方法隨機選取2013年7月-2014年6月該院收治的60例膽石癥患者為研究對象，按照手術方法的不同將其分為觀察組30例與對照組30例；給予觀察組經膽囊管腹腔鏡膽道探查術治療，給予對照組經膽總管切開T管引流手術治療。術後對比分析兩組患者的手術時間、引流時間、術後排氣時間、住院時間以及併髮癥髮生情況等。結果觀察組手術時間、引流時間、術後排氣時間、住院時間均明顯低于對照組；且兩組比較差異有統計學意義(P<0.05)。觀察組併髮癥總髮生率為4.0%，對照組併髮癥總髮生率為28.0%，同時觀察組的膽漏、急性胰腺炎、急性膽汁腹膜炎、肝下積液感染、引流不暢等併髮癥的髮生率顯著小于對照組，兩組比較差異有統計學意義(P<0.05)。結論使用膽囊管腹腔鏡膽道探查術治療膽總管結石癥的效果優于膽總管切開T管引流手術，且該手術方法術後併髮癥髮生率要低于膽總管切開T管引流手術，因此該方法值得臨床推廣應用。
목적：탐토대비경담낭관복강경담도탐사술여경담총관절개T관인류수술치료담총관결석적림상효과。방법수궤선취2013년7월-2014년6월해원수치적60례담석증환자위연구대상，안조수술방법적불동장기분위관찰조30례여대조조30례；급여관찰조경담낭관복강경담도탐사술치료，급여대조조경담총관절개T관인류수술치료。술후대비분석량조환자적수술시간、인류시간、술후배기시간、주원시간이급병발증발생정황등。결과관찰조수술시간、인류시간、술후배기시간、주원시간균명현저우대조조；차량조비교차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)。관찰조병발증총발생솔위4.0%，대조조병발증총발생솔위28.0%，동시관찰조적담루、급성이선염、급성담즙복막염、간하적액감염、인류불창등병발증적발생솔현저소우대조조，량조비교차이유통계학의의(P<0.05)。결론사용담낭관복강경담도탐사술치료담총관결석증적효과우우담총관절개T관인류수술，차해수술방법술후병발증발생솔요저우담총관절개T관인류수술，인차해방법치득림상추엄응용。
Objective To compare the effect between laparoscopic common bile duct exploration via cystic duct and choledo-cholithotomy with T-tube drainage in the treatment of choledocholithiasis. Methods 60 patients with choledocholithiasis admitted to our hospital between July 2013-June 2014 were selected as the research objects and divided into observation group(n=30) and control group (n=30) according to the different method of operation. The observation group received laparoscopic common bile duct exploration via cystic duct, while the control was given choledocholithotomy with T-tube drainage. Surgery time, drainage time, postoperative exhaust time, length of hospital stay, and complications of the two groups were compared. Results The observation group operating time, drainage time, postoperative exhaust time, length of hospital stay were significantly lower than the control group; And the more similar between the two groups have statistical significance, P<0.05. Observation group the total incidence of complications was 4.0%, control group total incidence of complications was 28.0%, the observation group at the same time of bile leakage, acute pancreatitis, acute biliary peritonitis, liver poor drainage of fluid from infection, the incidence of complications such as significantly less than the control group, two groups compare differences statistically significant, P<0.05). Conclusion In the treatment of choledocholithiasis, the effect of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration via cystic duct is better than that of choledocholithotomy with T-tube drainage which has higher of postoperative complications, so it is worthy of clinical popularization and application.
