Clinical efficacy and prognosis of different lithotripsy strategies for difficult common bile duct stones
10.3760/cma.j.cn113884-20250127-00035
- VernacularTitle:不同碎石方案治疗困难胆总管结石的疗效及预后
- Author:
Pengfei ZHANG
1
;
Ming ZHANG
1
;
Donghai ZHUANG
1
;
Li LIANG
1
;
Baochang SHI
1
;
Jinglong GUO
1
;
Rui WU
1
;
Kai ZHANG
1
Author Information
1. 山东大学附属山东省立第三医院肝胆外科，山东 250031
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Choledocholithiasis;
Laser lithotripsy;
Mechanical lithotripsy;
Peroral cholangioscopy;
Clinical efficacy
- From:
Chinese Journal of Hepatobiliary Surgery
2025;31(6):420-425
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To evaluate the clinical efficacy and prognosis of mechanical lithotripsy, laser lithotripsy under direct peroral cholangioscopy, and their combination in the treatment of difficult common bile duct (CBD) stones.Methods:Clinical data of 345 patients with difficult CBD stones treated at the Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Shandong Provincial Third Hospital, Shandong University, between January 2020 and December 2024 were retrospectively analyzed, including 176 males and 169 females, aged (71.2±14.2) years. Patients were categorized into three groups based on the lithotripsy technique used: mechanical lithotripsy group ( n=275), laser lithotripsy group under direct peroral cholangioscopy ( n=34), and combined lithotripsy group ( n=35). Operative time, hospitalization costs, stone clearance rate, and postoperative complications were recorded. Follow-ups were conducted through outpatient visits and telephone reviews to monitor stone recurrence. Propensity score matching (PSM) at a 1: 3 nearest-neighbor ratio with a caliper of 0.02 was performed, using lithotripsy method as the dependent variable, and age, sex, stone size, and bile duct diameter as independent variables, resulting in well-balanced mechanical and laser lithotripsy groups. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to assess recurrence-free survival, with comparisons performed using the log-rank test. Results:Before PSM, there were significant differences in age, sex, stone length, and bile duct diameter between the groups (all P<0.05). After PSM, 40 patients were included in the mechanical lithotripsy group, 34 in the laser group, and 35 in the combined group, with no significant differences in baseline or preoperative clinical characteristics (all P>0.05). The combined group had a significantly longer operative time compared to the mechanical group [71.0 (66.0, 92.0) min vs. 50.5 (40.4, 56.5) min, Z=-5.02, P<0.001] and the laser group [71.0 (66.0, 92.0) min vs. 53.0 (26.5, 73.5) min, Z=-2.61, P=0.001]. The laser group also had a longer operative time than the mechanical group [53.0 (26.5, 73.5) min vs. 50.5 (40.4, 56.5) min, Z=-2.27, P=0.023]. Hospitalization costs were significantly higher in the combined group compared to the mechanical group [43 000(33 000, 50 000) yuan vs. 30 000(26 000, 37 000) yuan; Z=-3.43, P<0.001]. The single-session stone clearance rates were 80.0% (32/40) for the mechanical group, 85.3% (29/34) for the laser group, and 62.9% (22/35) for the combined group. Postoperative complication rates were 20.0% (8/40), 11.7% (4/34), and 11.4% (4/35), respectively, with no statistically significant differences among the three groups (all P>0.05). There were also no significant differences in cumulative recurrence-free survival among the groups ( χ2=0.06, P=0.970). Conclusions:For endoscopic management of difficult CBD stones, combined lithotripsy is associated with longer operative time and higher hospitalization costs compared to mechanical and laser lithotripsy alone. Laser lithotripsy also requires more operative time than mechanical lithotripsy. However, the three lithotripsy strategies show no significant differences in postoperative complications or cumulative recurrence-free survival.
