Pimstone N R, Mok H Y
Surg Clin North Am. 1981 Aug;61(4):865-74. doi: 10.1016/s0039-6109(16)42484-9.
Medical dissolution of gallstones is feasible and has worked in clinical practice. Cholelithiasis is both common and a cause of significant morbidity nationally. Thus, to readdress the question posed in the introduction, should there be a more aggressive detection of populations at risk to consider prophylactic or early treatment of gallstones, one has to consider the following. Is it cost effective to treat people with asymptomatic stones when one half of gallstones detected at autopsy have not caused trouble in life? Will the reduction of one health hazard create other hazards, such as colonic cancer? Is it improving the quality of the patient's life after successful treatment to have the person return every year for ultrasound or radiologic check-ups for recurrence of gallstones? We feel that despite the low morbidity and mortality of elective surgery, medical dissolution of gallstones is a viable alternative, but, as with most medical decisions, the pros and cons of any therapy for cholelithiasis will ultimately be a decision based on the physician, the patient, and the situation. On the basis of what has been discussed in this review, the approach to treatment should involve a rational understanding of all alternatives.
胆结石的药物溶解是可行的,并且已在临床实践中得到应用。胆石症在全国范围内既常见又会导致严重发病。因此,为了重新审视引言中提出的问题,即是否应该更积极地检测高危人群以考虑对胆结石进行预防性或早期治疗,人们必须考虑以下几点。当尸检时发现的一半胆结石在生活中并未引发问题时,治疗无症状结石患者是否具有成本效益?减少一种健康危害是否会产生其他危害,例如结肠癌?成功治疗后让患者每年返回进行超声或放射学检查以检测胆结石复发,这是否能提高患者的生活质量?我们认为,尽管择期手术的发病率和死亡率较低,但胆结石的药物溶解是一种可行的替代方法,但是,与大多数医疗决策一样,任何胆结石治疗方法的利弊最终都将由医生、患者和具体情况来决定。基于本综述中所讨论的内容,治疗方法应该包括对所有替代方案的理性理解。