Department of Bile Duct Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, Sichuan Province, China.
World J Gastroenterol. 2012 Jun 28;18(24):3156-66. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i24.3156.
To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones.
Four databases, including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Science Citation Index up to September 2011, were searched to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data were extracted from the studies by two independent reviewers. The primary outcomes were stone clearance from the common bile duct, postoperative morbidity and mortality. The secondary outcomes were conversion to other procedures, number of procedures per patient, length of hospital stay, total operative time, hospitalization charges, patient acceptance and quality of life scores.
Seven eligible RCTs [five trials (n = 621) comparing preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)/endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) + laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with LC + laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE); two trials (n = 166) comparing postoperative ERCP/EST + LC with LC + LCBDE], composed of 787 patients in total, were included in the final analysis. The meta-analysis detected no statistically significant difference between the two groups in stone clearance from the common bile duct [risk ratios (RR) = -0.10, 95% confidence intervals (CI): -0.24 to 0.04, P = 0.17], postoperative morbidity (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.10, P = 0.16), mortality (RR = 2.19, 95% CI: 0.33 to 14.67, P = 0.42), conversion to other procedures (RR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.54 to 2.70, P = 0.39), length of hospital stay (MD = 0.99, 95% CI: -1.59 to 3.57, P = 0.45), total operative time (MD = 12.14, 95% CI: -1.83 to 26.10, P = 0.09). Two-stage (LC + ERCP/EST) management clearly required more procedures per patient than single-stage (LC + LCBDE) management.
Single-stage management is equivalent to two-stage management but requires fewer procedures. However, patient's condition, operator's expertise and local resources should be taken into account in making treatment decisions.
评估两阶段与单阶段治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的安全性和有效性。
检索了 4 个数据库,包括 PubMed、Embase、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册数据库和科学引文索引,以确定所有随机对照试验(RCT)。由两位独立评审员从研究中提取数据。主要结局指标为胆总管结石清除率、术后发病率和死亡率。次要结局指标为转为其他手术、每位患者的手术次数、住院时间、总手术时间、住院费用、患者接受度和生活质量评分。
纳入了 7 项 RCT(5 项试验,n = 621,比较术前内镜逆行胰胆管造影术/内镜括约肌切开术+腹腔镜胆囊切除术与腹腔镜胆囊切除术+腹腔镜胆总管探查术;2 项试验,n = 166,比较术后内镜逆行胰胆管造影术/内镜括约肌切开术+腹腔镜胆囊切除术与腹腔镜胆囊切除术+腹腔镜胆总管探查术),共 787 例患者,最终进行了分析。荟萃分析显示,两组胆总管结石清除率[风险比(RR)=-0.10,95%置信区间(CI):-0.24 至 0.04,P = 0.17]、术后发病率(RR = 0.79,95% CI:0.58 至 1.10,P = 0.16)、死亡率(RR = 2.19,95% CI:0.33 至 14.67,P = 0.42)、转为其他手术(RR = 1.21,95% CI:0.54 至 2.70,P = 0.39)、住院时间(MD = 0.99,95% CI:-1.59 至 3.57,P = 0.45)、总手术时间(MD = 12.14,95% CI:-1.83 至 26.10,P = 0.09)差异均无统计学意义。两阶段(LC+ERCP/EST)治疗明显比单阶段(LC+LCBDE)治疗需要更多的手术次数。
单阶段治疗与两阶段治疗等效,但需要的手术次数更少。然而,在做出治疗决策时,应考虑患者的病情、术者的专业技能和当地资源。