Home    中文  
 
  • Search
  • lucene Search
  • Citation
  • Fig/Tab
  • Adv Search
Just Accepted  |  Current Issue  |  Archive  |  Featured Articles  |  Most Read  |  Most Download  |  Most Cited

Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition) ›› 2020, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (05): 499-503. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2020.05.020

Special Issue:

• Original Article • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Endoscopic minimal invasive cholecystolithotomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy for cholecystolithiasis: a meta-analysis

Kai Zhong1, Mutalifu Mureaihemaitijiang·1, Fashun Lu1, Xiaojie Zhen2, Tiemin Jiang1, Bo Ran1, Qiang Guo1, Ruiqing Zhang1, Aji Tuerganaili·1, Yingmei Shao1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Hepatobiliary & Hydatid Diseases, Digestive & Vascular Surgery Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, China; Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region Clinical Research Center for Echinococcosis and Hepatobiliary Diseases, First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, China
    2. Subject Construction Section of the Department of Teaching and Research; The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, China
  • Received:2020-02-07 Online:2020-10-26 Published:2020-10-26
  • Contact: Yingmei Shao
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Shao Yingmei, Email:
  • Supported by:
    Key discipline of the 13th five-year plan of autonomous region (Peak discipline)(New Teaching Research (2016) No.7); Natural Science Foundation of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region(2018D01C220); National Natural Science Foundation of China(81660108); National Key R&D Program of China(2017YFC0909903); Key Laboratory of Basic Medicine for hydatidosis in Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region(2017D04004)

Abstract:

Objective

Using meta-analysis to evaluate the clinical efficacy of Endoscopic Minimal Invasive Cholecystolithotomy (EMIC) and Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (LC) in the treatment of gallstones.

Methods

A comparative study of EMIC and LC for the treatment of gallstones in the Chinese biomedical literature database, China knowledge network, Vip, WanFang database, and PubMed , database from 2015 to 2020, a total of 9 literatures were included (1113 patients). Meta analysis was performed with stata15. The effectiveness and safety of the two methods were compared with 95% confidence interval (CI), calculated odds ratio (OR).

Results

The results of meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in the time of operation [SMD=0.471(-0.154, 1.097)], the time of hospitalization [SMD=-0.341(-0.688, 0.007)], the incidence of postoperative complications [OR=0.531(0.247, 1.138)](P>0.05). However, the difference in the amount of intraoperative bleeding [SMD=-1.255(-2.152, -0.358)] and the time of postoperative gastrointestinal ventilation [SMD=-1.778(-3.059, -0.497)] was statistically significant(P<0.05), the cost of hospitalization in the EMIC group was higher than that in the LC group [SMD=0.232(0.043, 0.422)](P<0.05). The LC group was lower than the EMIC group in terms of the recurrence rate of postoperative stones [OR=3.513(1.031, 11.964)](P<0.05).

Conclusions

Compared with LC, the EMIC in the treatment of gallstone has its unique advantages, mainly characterized by less intraoperative bleeding, patients with rapid recovery of gastrointestinal function. The cost of hospitalization and the recurrence rate of stones in EMIC group were higher than that in LC group. It is necessary to strictly control the surgical indications through more detailed and careful thinking about what kind of operation method to treat gallstones in clinic.

Key words: Cholecystectomy, laparoscopic, Meta-analysis, Endoscopic minimal invasive cholecystolithotomy, Comparative effectiveness research

京ICP 备07035254号-3
Copyright © Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), All Rights Reserved.
Tel: 66721881; 64049986 E-mail: zhpwkssx@126.com
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd