全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...
华西医学  2014 

经内镜逆行胰胆管造影与开腹手术治疗胆总管结石及其合并胆囊良性病变的成本-效果分析

DOI: 10.7507/1002-0179.20140555, PP. 1823-1826

Keywords: 胆总管结石,经内镜逆行胰胆管造影,腹腔镜,开腹手术,成本-效果分析

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

目的 比较经内镜逆行胰胆管造影与开腹手术治疗单纯胆总管结石及胆总管结石合并胆囊良性病变的成本-效果。方法 对2009年1月-2012年12月596例接受ERCP治疗(ERCP组)及173例接受开腹胆总管切开取石术(手术取石组)的单纯胆总管结石患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析,比较两组患者的治愈率、术后并发症发生率、住院时间、术前准备时间及住院总费用。对同一时期29例接受ERCP+腹腔镜胆囊切除(LC)术治疗(ERCP+LC组),38例接受单纯腹腔镜治疗(腹腔镜组)及129例接受开腹胆总管切开取石术+胆囊切除术(手术取石+切除组)的胆总管结石合并胆囊良性病变患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析,比较指标同上。结果 单纯胆总管结石患者中,ERCP组与手术取石组的治愈率及术后并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);但住院总费用(1.31±0.63)万元、(2.06±0.75)万元、住院时间(8.91±4.95)、(12.14±5.15)d及术前准备时间(3.77±3.09)、(5.13±3.99)d比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。胆总管结石合并胆囊良性病变患者中,3组间治愈率及术后并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。ERCP+LC组与手术取石+切除组住院总费用(1.89±0.46)万元、(2.32±0.89)万元、住院时间(9.00±3.74)、(12.47±4.50)d及术前准备时间(3.24±1.83)、(5.15±2.98)d比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。ERCP+LC组与腹腔镜组比较,住院总费用与住院时间差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);但前者术前准备时间明显短于后者,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论 对于单纯胆总管结石的治疗,ERCP具有费用少、住院时间及术前准备时间短且与外科手术等效的优点;对于胆总管结石合并胆囊良性疾病的治疗,ERCP+LC术相比传统外科开腹手术,也具有同样的优势。

References

[1]  [ 1 ] 张振中, 孙源源, 昭建国, 等. 十二指肠镜治疗胆总管结石与腹腔镜和外科手术的成本-效果分析 [J]. 中国医师进修杂志, 2011, 34(8): 55-57.
[2]  [ 2 ] Clayton ES, Connor S, Alexakis N, et al. Meta-analysis of endoscopy and surgery versus surgery alone for common bile duct stones with the gallbladder in situ[J]. B J Surg, 2006(93): 1185-1191.
[3]  [ 3 ] Yoshida K1, Yamazaki Y, Mizuno R, et al. Laparoscopic splenectomy in children. Preliminary results and comparison with the open technique[J]. Surg Endosc, 1995, 9(12): 1279-1282.
[4]  [ 4 ] Sgourakis G, Lanitis S, Karaliotas CH, et al. Laparoscopic versus endoscopic primary management of choledocholithiasis. A retrospective case-control study[J]. Chirurg, 2012, 83(10): 897-903.
[5]  [ 5 ] 李俊达, 何剑琴. 内镜治疗胆总管结石与传统手术的疗效分析[J]. 中国内镜杂志, 2007, 13(7): 705-707.
[6]  [ 6 ] 苏秉忠, 陈平, 宋建忠, 等. 胆总管结石内镜和手术治疗效果的对照分析[J]. 现代消化及介入诊疗, 2007, 12(4): 228-231.
[7]  [ 7 ] 许卓明, 苏树英, 甄作均, 等. 腹腔镜胆总管切开术与内镜括约肌切开术治疗胆总管结石的比较[J]. 中华普通外科杂志, 2007, 22(6): 410-412.
[8]  [ 8 ] Lu J, Cheng Y, Xiong XZ, et al. Two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2012, 18(24): 3156-3166.
[9]  [ 9 ] Bansal VK, Misra MC, Rajan K, et al. Single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and cholecystectomy versus two-stage endoscopic stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with concomitant gallbladder stones and common bile duct stones: a randomized controlled trial[J]. Surg Endosc, 2014, 28(3): 875-885.
[10]   Alexakis N, Connor S. Meta-analysis of one-vs two-stage laparoscopic/endoscopic management of common bile duct stones[J]. HPB (Oxford), 2012, 14(4): 254-259.
[11]   Dasari BV, Tan CJ, Gurusamy KS, et al. Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2013, 9: CD003327.
[12]   Zang JF, Zhang C, Gao JY. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and laparoscopic cholecystectomy during the same session: feasibility and safety[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2013, 19(36): 6093-3097.
[13]   Jones M, Johnson M, Samourjian E, et al. ERCP and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a combined (one-step) procedure: a random comparison to the standard (two-step) procedure[J]. Surg Endosc, 2013, 27(6): 1907-1912.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133