首页|期刊导航|肝胆胰外科杂志|LC联合术中ERCP与LC联合LTCBDE治疗胆囊结石合并非扩张型胆总管结石的效果比较:一项倾向性评分匹配研究

LC联合术中ERCP与LC联合LTCBDE治疗胆囊结石合并非扩张型胆总管结石的效果比较:一项倾向性评分匹配研究OA

Efficacy comparison of LC combined with intraoperative ERCP versus LC combined with LTCBDE in the treatment of gallbladder stones combined with non-dilated common bile duct stones:A propensity score matching study

中文摘要英文摘要

目的 分析腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)联合术中内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)对比LC联合腹腔镜下经胆囊管胆总管探查取石术(LTCBDE)治疗胆囊结石合并非扩张型胆总管结石的安全性和有效性.方法 回顾性收集2022年10月至2024年10月于山东省立第三医院诊断为胆囊结石合并非扩张型胆总管结石并接受LC联合术中ERCP或LC联合LTCBDE的312例患者临床资料,按手术方式分为LC+术中ERCP组(n=160)和LC+LTCBDE组(n=152),采用倾向性评分匹配(PSM)进行1∶1匹配,卡钳值设为0.1.观察并比较匹配后两组患者术中和术后各项指标及并发症等情况.结果 PSM后,两组各纳入131例.LC+术中ERCP组与LC+LTCBDE组手术成功率(99.2%vs 98.5%,P=1.000)和结石清除率(100.0%vs 99.2%,P=1.000)差异均无统计学意义.LC+术中ERCP组较LC+LTCBDE组手术时间更长[(99.1±28.9)min vs(84.2±24.8)min,t=4.492,P<0.01],但术后住院时间明显更短[(4.0±1.7)d vs(6.8±2.3)d,t=-11.076,P<0.01],差异均有统计学意义.LC+术中ERCP组与LC+LTCBDE组术后并发症总发生率(7.6%vs 5.3%,χ2=0.566,P=0.452)差异无统计学意义.对LC+术中ERCP组亚组分析表明,先ERCP组(n=23)与先LC组(n=108)在手术成功率、总手术时间、术中出血量及并发症总发生率方面比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 LC联合术中ERCP或LC联合LTCBDE治疗胆囊结石合并非扩张型胆总管结石均安全有效.建议结合患者自身状况,医疗单位条件和医师手术水平综合评估,选择最佳治疗方案.

Objective To compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic cholecystectomy(LC)combined with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP)versus LC combined with laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration(LTCBDE)in the treatment of gallbladder stones combined with non-dilated common bile duct stones.Methods The clinical data of 312 patients,who diagnosed with gallbladder stones combined with non-dilated common bile duct stones and underwent LC combined with intraoperative ERCP or LC combined with LTCBDE in Shandong Provincial Third Hospital from October 2022 to October 2024,were retrospectively collected.Patients were divided into the LC+intraoperative ERCP group(n=160)and the LC+LTCBDE group(n=152)according to the surgical methods.Propensity score matching(PSM)was conducted at a ratio of 1∶1,with the caliper value of 0.1.The intraoperative and postoperative indicators and the postoperative complications between the two groups after PSM were compared.Results After PSM,131 cases were included in both groups.There was no statistically significant difference in the surgical success rate(99.2%vs 98.5%,P=1.000)and stone clearance rate(100.0%vs 99.2%,P=1.000)between the LC+intraoperative ERCP group and the LC+LTCBDE group(P>0.05).The operation time in the LC+introperative ERCP group was longer than that in the LC+LTCBDE group[(99.1±28.9)min vs(84.2±24.8)min,t=4.492,P<0.01],while the postoperative hospitalization time in the LC+intraoperative ERCP group was shorter than that in the LC+LTCBDE group[(4.0±1.7)d vs(6.8±2.3)d,t=-11.076,P<0.01].There was no statistically significant difference in the total incidence rate of postoperative complication between the two groups(7.6%vs 5.3%,χ2=0.566,P=0.452).Further subgroup analysis for the LC+intraoperative ERCP group indicated that,there was no statistically significant difference between the ERCP priority group(n=23)and the LC priority group(n=108)in terms of the success rate of operation,the total operation time,the intraoperative blood loss and the total incidence rate of postoperative complications(P>0.05).Conclusion Both LC+intraoperative ERCP or LC+LTCBDE can treat gallbladder stones combined with non-dilated common bile duct stones safely and effectively.It is recommended to comprehensively evaluate and select the best treatment plan based on the patient's condition,the conditions of the unit,and the surgical ability of the physician.

张洪战;刘珊珊;张明;张锎;郭景龙;牛帅

山东大学附属山东省立第三医院肝胆外科,山东 济南 250031济南市儿童医院儿童重症医学科,山东 济南 250022山东大学附属山东省立第三医院肝胆外科,山东 济南 250031山东大学附属山东省立第三医院肝胆外科,山东 济南 250031山东大学附属山东省立第三医院肝胆外科,山东 济南 250031山东大学附属山东省立第三医院肝胆外科,山东 济南 250031

医药卫生

胆总管结石胆囊结石非扩张型胆总管腹腔镜胆囊切除术内镜逆行胰胆管造影腹腔镜经胆囊管胆总管探查取石术

bile duct stonesgallbladder stonesnon-dilated common bile ductlaparoscopic cholecystectomyendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographylaparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration

《肝胆胰外科杂志》 2026 (1)

31-38,8

10.11952/j.issn.1007-1954.2026.01.007

评论