Chen Jia-Hui, Chung Chi-Hsiang, Li Chung-Hsien, Chien Wu-Chien, Chang Chao-Feng
Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital, The Buddhist Medical Foundation, New Taipei City 231, Taiwan.
School of Medicine, Buddhist Tzu Chi University, Hualien 970, Taiwan.
J Clin Med. 2022 Feb 12;11(4):970. doi: 10.3390/jcm11040970.
(1) Background: Open, laparoscopic, and endoscopic choledocholithotomy (OC, LC, and EC, respectively) are accepted choledocholithiasis treatment modalities. However, an assessment of the nationwide trends in their outcomes is lacking. This nationwide population-based analysis evaluated treatment outcomes of choledocholithiasis in Taiwan; (2) Methods: A total of 13,139,306 individuals were randomly enrolled from the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database (LHID) between 2000 to 2013 for cohort analysis. All patients with newly diagnosed choledocholithiasis aged 18 years or older who were treated during the study period were enrolled and allocated to the OC, LC, EC, or combined endoscopy and open choledocholithotomy (CEOC) groups. Age, readmission, retained stone, comorbidities, hospital stay, medical cost, complications, mortality were analyzed; (3) Results: A total of 58,064 individuals met the inclusion criteria, including 46.54%, 1.10%, 47.52%, and 4.85% who underwent OC, LC, EC, and CEOC, respectively. The endpoint characteristics showed that the LC group had higher readmission, longer hospital stay, and higher medical cost. Cox regression analysis showed that the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of complications for EC was 1.259 times higher than that for OC. The adjusted HRs of readmission within 90 days for LC, EC, and CEOC were higher than that of OC. The adjusted HR of retreatment with surgery was higher in LC. The adjusted HR of retreatment with endoscopy was higher in CEOC. The adjusted HR of mortality in EC was 1.603 times that of OC; (4) Conclusions: Different choledocholithiasis treatments lead to different outcomes. However, further studies on other large or national data sets are required to support these findings.
(1) 背景:开放胆总管切开取石术、腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术及内镜下胆总管切开取石术(分别为OC、LC和EC)是公认的胆总管结石治疗方式。然而,目前缺乏对其治疗效果全国性趋势的评估。这项基于全国人群的分析评估了台湾地区胆总管结石的治疗效果;(2) 方法:2000年至2013年期间,从纵向健康保险数据库(LHID)中随机抽取13139306名个体进行队列分析。纳入所有在研究期间接受治疗的18岁及以上新诊断胆总管结石患者,并将其分配至OC、LC、EC或内镜与开放胆总管切开取石术联合治疗(CEOC)组。分析患者年龄、再入院情况、结石残留、合并症、住院时间、医疗费用、并发症及死亡率;(3) 结果:共有58064名个体符合纳入标准,其中分别接受OC、LC、EC和CEOC治疗的患者占比为46.54%、1.10%、47.52%和4.85%。终点指标特征显示,LC组再入院率更高、住院时间更长且医疗费用更高。Cox回归分析显示,EC组并发症的调整风险比(HR)比OC组高1.259倍。LC、EC和CEOC组90天内再入院的调整HR高于OC组。LC组手术再次治疗的调整HR更高。CEOC组内镜再次治疗的调整HR更高。EC组的调整死亡率HR是OC组的1.603倍;(4) 结论:不同的胆总管结石治疗方式导致不同的治疗效果。然而,需要对其他大型或全国性数据集进行进一步研究以支持这些发现。