Clinical efficacy analysis of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and stone removal via the cystic duct with a flexible ureteroscope
10.3760/cma.j.cn113884-20241217-00379
- VernacularTitle:腹腔镜下运用输尿管软镜行经胆囊管胆总管探查取石术的临床疗效分析
- Author:
Shibao CHENG
1
;
Wei HU
1
;
Chongyu WEN
1
;
Guoliang LIAO
1
;
Hao ZHANG
1
;
Xiaokang ZHI
1
;
Shenglin ZOU
1
;
Xingling ZHENG
1
;
Jiyuan AI
1
Author Information
1. 南昌市第三医院肝胆外科，南昌 330009
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Choledocholithiasis;
Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration;
Flexible ureteroscope;
Via the cystic duct
- From:
Chinese Journal of Hepatobiliary Surgery
2025;31(2):92-95
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To analyze the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and stone removal via the cystic duct with a flexible ureteroscope.Methods:The clinical data of 96 patients with cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis who were admitted to the Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, the Third Hospital of Nanchang from September 2021 to November 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 49 male and 47 female patients, aged (59.2±13.9) years. The 96 patients were randomly divided into two groups according to the surgical methods: the flexible ureteroscope group ( n=48) and the choledochotomy group ( n=48), patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus flexible ureteroscope for common bile duct exploration and stone removal via the cystic duct were included in the flexible ureteroscope group; patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus choledocholithotomy and T-tube drainage placement were included in the choledochotomy group. Clinical data including operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative intestinal function recovery time, abdominal drainage tube removal time, postoperative hospital stay and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. Results:Compared with the choledochotomy group, the operation time [150 (120, 176) min vs. 197 (165, 240) min], intraoperative blood loss [20 (10, 30) ml vs. 30 (20, 50) ml], postoperative intestinal function recovery time [2 (1, 2) d vs. 3 (2, 4) d], abdominal drainage tube removal time [6 (4, 7) d vs. 7 (6, 8) d], and postoperative hospital stay [8 (6, 9) d vs. 16 (13, 17) d] in the flexible ureteroscope group were all reduced, and the differences were statistically significant (all P<0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications in the choledochotomy group was 10.4% (5/48), compared with 2.1% (1/48) in the flexible ureteroscope group. There was no statistically significant difference ( χ2=1.60, P=0.206). Conclusion:Compared with laparoscopic choledocholithotomy plus T-tube drainage, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and stone removal via the cystic duct with a flexible ureteroscope can shorten the hospital stay of patients with choledocholithiasis, offering a minimally invasive, safe and effective treatment method.
