Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
Department of Surgery, Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University, Philadelphia, PA.
J Am Coll Surg. 2018 Apr;226(4):568-576.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2017.12.023. Epub 2018 Jan 4.
The increased incidence of bile duct injuries (BDIs) after the adoption of laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been well documented. However, the longitudinal impact of bile leaks and BDIs on survival and healthcare use have not been studied adequately. The aims of this analysis were to determine the incidence, long-term outcomes, and costs of bile leaks and ductal injuries in a large population.
The California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database was queried from 2005 to 2014. Bile leaks, BDIs, and their management strategy were defined. Survival was calculated by Kaplan-Meier failure estimates with multivariable regression and propensity analyses. Cost analyses used inflation adjustments and institution-specific cost-to-charge ratios.
Of 711,454 cholecystecomies, bile leaks occurred in 3,551 patients (0.50%) and were managed almost exclusively by endoscopists. Bile duct injuries occurred in 1,584 patients (0.22%) with 84% managed surgically. Patients with a bile leak were more likely to die at 1 year (2.4% vs 1.4%; odds ratio 1.85; p < 0.001). Similarly, BDI patients had an increased 1-year mortality (7.2% vs 1.3%; odds ratio 2.04; p < 0.0001). Survival of BDI patients was better with an operative approach (odds ratio 0.19; p < 0.001) when compared with endoscopic management. Operatively managed BDIs were also associated with fewer emergency department visits and readmissions, as well as lower cumulative costs at 1 year ($60,539 vs $118,245; p < 0.001).
The 0.22% incidence of BDIs observed in California is lower than reported in the first decade after the introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Bile leaks are 2.3 times more common than BDIs. Patients with a bile leak or BDI have diminished survival. Surgical repair of a BDI leads to enhanced survival and reduced cumulative cost compared with endoscopic management.
腹腔镜胆囊切除术应用后,胆管损伤(BDI)的发生率有所增加,这一点已有充分的文献记载。然而,胆管漏和 BDI 对生存和医疗保健使用的长期影响尚未得到充分研究。本分析的目的是确定在一个大人群中胆管漏和胆管损伤的发生率、长期结果和成本。
从 2005 年到 2014 年,对加利福尼亚州全州卫生规划和发展办公室数据库进行了查询。定义了胆管漏和 BDI 及其管理策略。通过多变量回归和倾向分析的 Kaplan-Meier 失败估计来计算生存率。成本分析使用了通胀调整和机构特定的成本与收费比。
在 711454 例胆囊切除术患者中,有 3551 例(0.50%)发生胆管漏,几乎完全由内镜医生治疗。有 1584 例(0.22%)患者发生胆管损伤,其中 84%通过手术治疗。发生胆管漏的患者在 1 年内死亡的可能性更高(2.4%比 1.4%;比值比 1.85;p<0.001)。同样,BDI 患者在 1 年内的死亡率也更高(7.2%比 1.3%;比值比 2.04;p<0.0001)。与内镜治疗相比,手术治疗 BDI 患者的生存率更高(比值比 0.19;p<0.001)。手术治疗的 BDI 患者也与较少的急诊就诊和再入院以及 1 年内的累计成本较低有关(60539 美元比 118245 美元;p<0.001)。
在加利福尼亚州观察到的 0.22%BDI 发生率低于腹腔镜胆囊切除术引入后的第一个十年报告的发生率。胆管漏比 BDI 常见 2.3 倍。发生胆管漏或 BDI 的患者生存率降低。与内镜治疗相比,手术修复 BDI 可提高生存率并降低累计成本。