RESUMO
Common bile duct (CBD) stones are a frequent problem in Chinese populations, and their incidence is particularly high in certain areas (Wang et al., 2013). In recent years, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) have been the main surgical procedures for CBD stones, although each has different advantages and disadvantages in the treatment of choledocholithiasis (Loor et al., 2017; Zhou et al., 2017). For patients with large stones, a dilated CBD, especially concurrent gallstones, LCBDE is the preferred and most economical minimally invasive procedure (Koc et al., 2013). However, a T-tube is often placed during LCBDE to prevent postoperative bile leakage; this is associated with problems such as bile loss, electrolyte disturbance, and decreased gastric intake (Martin et al., 1998). In addition, the T-tube usually must remain in place for more than a month, during which time the patient's quality of life is seriously compromised. Many skilled surgeons currently perform primary closure of the CBD following LCBDE, which effectively speeds up rehabilitation (Hua et al., 2015). However, even in sophisticated medical centers, the incidence of postoperative bile leakage still reaches ≥10% (Liu et al., 2017). Especially for a beginner, bile leakage remains a key problem (Kemp Bohan et al., 2017). Therefore, a safe and effective minimally invasive surgical approach to preventing bile leakage during primary closure of the CBD after LCBDE is still urgently needed.
Assuntos
Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Coledocolitíase , Doenças do Ducto Colédoco , Drenagem/métodos , Cálculos Biliares , Gastroscopia , LaparoscopiaRESUMO
<p><b>BACKGROUND</b>Laparoscopic resection (LAP) for small bowel gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) is not as common as for stomach. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LAP for small bowel GISTs with systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>The Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed databases before December 2016 were comprehensively searched to retrieve comparative trials of LAP and conventional open resection (OPEN) for GISTs of small bowel with a relevance of review object. These researches reported intraoperative and postoperative clinical course (operation time, blood loss, time to first flatus and oral intake, hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality), oncologic outcomes, and long-term survival status.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Six studies involving 391 patients were identified. Compared to OPEN, LAP had associated with a shorter operation time (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -27.97 min, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -49.40--6.54, P < 0.01); less intraoperative blood loss (WMD = -0.72 ml; 95% CI: -1.30--0.13, P = 0.02); earlier time to flatus (WMD = -0.83 day; 95% CI: -1.44--0.22, P < 0.01); earlier time to restart oral intake (WMD = -1.95 days; 95% CI: -3.31--0.60, P < 0.01); shorter hospital stay (WMD = -3.00 days; 95% CI: -4.87--1.13, P < 0.01); and a decrease in overall complications (risk ratio = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.33-0.97, P = 0.04). In addition, the tumor recurrence and long-term survival rate showed that there was no significant difference between the two groups of patients.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>LAP for small bowel GISTs is a safe and feasible procedure with shorter operation time, less blood loss, less overall complications, and quicker recovery. Besides, tumor recurrence and the long-term survival rate are similar to open approach. Because of the limitations of this study, methodologically high-quality studies are needed for certain appraisal.</p>
RESUMO
<p><b>BACKGROUND</b>Laparoscopic liver resection has become an accepted treatment for liver tumors or intrahepatic bile duct stones, but its application in patients with previous upper abdominal surgery is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic hepatectomy in these patients.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Three hundred and thirty-six patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy at our hospital from March 2012 to June 2015 were enrolled in the retrospective study. They were divided into two groups: Those with previous upper abdominal surgery (PS group, n = 42) and a control group with no previous upper abdominal surgery (NS group, n = 294). Short-term outcomes including operating time, blood loss, hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality were compared among the groups.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>There was no significant difference in median operative duration between the PS group and the NS group (180 min vs. 160 min, P = 0.869). Median intraoperative blood loss was same between the PS group and the control group (200 ml vs. 200 ml, P = 0.907). The overall complication rate was significantly lower in the NS group than in the PS group (17.0% vs. 31.0%, P = 0.030). Mortality and other short-term outcomes did not differ significantly between groups.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>Our study showed no significant difference between the PS group and NS group in term of short-term outcomes. Laparoscopic hepatectomy is a feasible and safe procedure for patients with previous upper abdominal surgery.</p>