梁廷波 粟偉 馬濤 白雪莉
·述 評(píng)·
醫(yī)源性膽管損傷:膽囊切除術(shù)的阿喀琉斯之踵
梁廷波 粟偉 馬濤 白雪莉
醫(yī)源性膽管損傷(iatrogenic bile duct injuries,IBDI)是膽囊切除術(shù)的一種嚴(yán)重并發(fā)癥,其不僅損害病人的身心健康,同時(shí)也對(duì)外科醫(yī)生及醫(yī)保系統(tǒng)造成嚴(yán)重負(fù)面影響。IBDI核心在于預(yù)防,關(guān)鍵在于及時(shí)診斷。把握手術(shù)時(shí)機(jī),選擇合理手術(shù)方式,IBDI亦可取得良好的遠(yuǎn)期治療效果。本文將從預(yù)防、診斷及治療三方面對(duì)IBDI的診治現(xiàn)狀與趨勢(shì)進(jìn)行闡述。
醫(yī)源性膽管損傷;膽囊切除術(shù);手術(shù)中并發(fā)癥;預(yù)防;診斷;治療
膽囊切除術(shù)是肝膽胰外科最常見的手術(shù),但自其開展以來,醫(yī)源性膽管損傷(iatrogenic bile duct injuries,IBDI)的問題就一直相伴相隨(如無特殊說明,下文所述IBDI皆指膽囊切除術(shù)所致IBDI)。1985年,德國年輕外科醫(yī)生Erich Muhe成功完成世界上首例腹腔鏡膽囊切除術(shù)(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)。LC以其創(chuàng)傷小、疼痛輕、恢復(fù)快、傷疤隱匿等優(yōu)點(diǎn),逐漸普及成為膽囊結(jié)石等膽囊良性疾病的首選外科術(shù)式。然而,IBDI問題并未得到改善,甚至有所加劇[1]。
雖然IBDI發(fā)生率僅為0.4%~1.0%[2-3],但考慮到膽囊切除術(shù)每年龐大的實(shí)施基數(shù),IBDI仍是一項(xiàng)“罕見”又“常見”的并發(fā)癥。在美國,34.1%的普通外科醫(yī)師曾遭遇嚴(yán)重的IBDI[4]。膽管損傷可引起膽管狹窄、膽管炎與膽管結(jié)石反復(fù)發(fā)作、肝膿腫、肝萎縮、膽汁性肝硬化,甚至肝衰竭等并發(fā)癥,大幅增加醫(yī)療費(fèi)用,并嚴(yán)重制約病人長(zhǎng)期生活質(zhì)量與工作能力[5-6]。因此,IBDI也成為最常引發(fā)醫(yī)療事故訴訟的原因之一[7]。
在本文中,筆者將結(jié)合個(gè)人經(jīng)驗(yàn)與最新文獻(xiàn)報(bào)道,從IBDI的預(yù)防、診斷及治療三方面進(jìn)行闡述。
1.IBDI的發(fā)病機(jī)制 根據(jù)發(fā)病機(jī)制,IBDI主要可以分為以下5類。①機(jī)械性損傷:通常由術(shù)中誤夾、誤剪、誤切、誤扎及暴力拉扯等機(jī)械原因所致,是IBDI中最常見的類型,其損傷部位單一,損傷范圍明確;②電熱性損傷:通常由電外科器械不當(dāng)使用造成,其早期病變范圍不明確,嚴(yán)重影響即時(shí)修復(fù)效果;③化學(xué)性損傷:常繼發(fā)于化學(xué)性消融術(shù)后,損傷范圍較大,嚴(yán)重者甚至可累及整個(gè)膽道系統(tǒng);④缺血性損傷:任何影響膽管血運(yùn)的操作均可造成此類損傷,其可呈遲發(fā)性病理過程,于術(shù)后數(shù)月甚至數(shù)年引發(fā)膽管狹窄;⑤復(fù)合性損傷:部分病人的膽管損傷可能涉及多種上述機(jī)制。
2.IBDI的危險(xiǎn)因素 Johnston[8]曾在1986年對(duì)膽管損傷的原因進(jìn)行總結(jié),歸結(jié)為危險(xiǎn)的解剖、危險(xiǎn)的病理與危險(xiǎn)的手術(shù)。如今回顧,仍頗有指導(dǎo)意義。
(1)危險(xiǎn)的解剖:Calot三角膽管變異非常多見,主要有膽囊管走行異常,右側(cè)副肝管的出現(xiàn)及膽囊管與肝外膽管匯合部異常等。當(dāng)發(fā)生結(jié)石嵌頓,如Mirizzi綜合征時(shí),膽管解剖更加復(fù)雜。此外,膽囊動(dòng)脈與右肝動(dòng)脈也常存在著走行分支變異。術(shù)中意外出血造成視野模糊及操作慌亂,增加膽管損傷的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。
(2)危險(xiǎn)的病理:膽囊急性炎癥期或慢性萎縮期,Calot三角等膽管區(qū)域組織或充血水腫,或瘢痕化,廣泛粘連,解剖層次不清,增加了手術(shù)的難度。肝硬化門靜脈高壓時(shí),Calot三角水腫增厚,靜脈代償性擴(kuò)張,凝血功能障礙,術(shù)中易發(fā)生難以控制的出血,使得膽管損傷的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)明顯增加。
(3)危險(xiǎn)的手術(shù):術(shù)者的經(jīng)驗(yàn)(如解剖結(jié)構(gòu)的判斷與突發(fā)情況的處理)、技術(shù)(如腹腔鏡及電外科器械的使用)及態(tài)度是影響膽囊切除術(shù)成功的重要因素。此外病人的一般情況及合并疾病也是影響手術(shù)成功的因素。特別地,腹腔鏡雖然具有放大組織細(xì)節(jié)的優(yōu)點(diǎn),但也存在二維平面圖像下立體空間失真、組織精細(xì)觸覺反饋缺乏、視野與操作空間狹小等固有缺陷。機(jī)器人外科系統(tǒng)部分克服了傳統(tǒng)腹腔鏡技術(shù)的缺陷,但昂貴的費(fèi)用使其暫難推廣。
3.術(shù)前評(píng)估與決策 選擇恰當(dāng)?shù)氖中g(shù)時(shí)機(jī)與手術(shù)方式是降低IBDI風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的前提。手術(shù)醫(yī)生術(shù)前應(yīng)綜合考慮病人的一般狀況及檢查資料,以預(yù)估手術(shù)的難度和可能遇到的風(fēng)險(xiǎn),并結(jié)合自身特點(diǎn),選擇合理的手術(shù)方式與解剖顯露技術(shù)。特別地,對(duì)于急性膽囊炎,通常主張避開炎癥水腫極期,及早手術(shù)(72 h內(nèi)),或積極內(nèi)科治療控制炎癥后(3個(gè)月后)再行膽囊切除術(shù)。部分病例炎癥持續(xù)存在或加重,或緩解后短時(shí)間再發(fā),無法等待,可由經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的醫(yī)生實(shí)施手術(shù)。如術(shù)中確實(shí)困難,可暫行膽囊大部切除術(shù),待炎癥消退后再行二次處理[9]。
4.Critical View of Safety原則 解剖結(jié)構(gòu)辨識(shí)錯(cuò)誤是IBDI最常見的原因,其中又以膽總管和變異肝管被誤判為膽囊管或膽囊動(dòng)脈最為常見。對(duì)此,Strasberg等[10]提出旨在準(zhǔn)確辨識(shí)膽囊管和膽囊動(dòng)脈的“Critical View of Safety(CVS)”原則。CVS要求清除膽囊三角內(nèi)所有脂肪和纖維組織,并至少游離膽囊下1/3以充分暴露膽囊床,確保有且僅有兩個(gè)管道結(jié)構(gòu)進(jìn)入膽囊。大型病例系列報(bào)告,CVS原則可減少甚至避免錯(cuò)誤辨識(shí)帶來的IBDI[10-11]。析因研究亦表明,IBDI極少由遵循CVS原則的手術(shù)導(dǎo)致[12-13]。因此,部分指南強(qiáng)烈推薦將CVS作為L(zhǎng)C的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)流程[14]。但是,CVS導(dǎo)致手術(shù)時(shí)間明顯延長(zhǎng),相對(duì)于極小概率的IBDI,常規(guī)進(jìn)行CVS效益成本比不高;并且在充分游離的過程中,本身就可能損傷血管及膽管;此外,部分“困難膽囊”根本無法實(shí)現(xiàn)CVS。因此,在臨床實(shí)踐中僅有20%的外科醫(yī)生術(shù)中較好地達(dá)到CVS的要求[15]。
5.術(shù)中膽道造影 術(shù)中膽道造影(intraoperative cholangiography,IOC)被廣泛認(rèn)為是一種可靠的預(yù)防技術(shù)。在LC中,常規(guī)實(shí)施IOC不僅可減低術(shù)中膽管損傷的發(fā)生率,還能于術(shù)中及時(shí)發(fā)現(xiàn)膽管損傷,避免損傷進(jìn)一步加重,并即時(shí)修復(fù)[16]。但也有學(xué)者認(rèn)為,IOC對(duì)“簡(jiǎn)單”的膽囊切除術(shù)并無保護(hù)作用,反而增加額外的手術(shù)時(shí)間、額外的醫(yī)療費(fèi)用及不必要的輻射暴露。此外,IOC本身即可能造成膽管損傷。因此,他們認(rèn)為選擇性IOC更為合理[17]。但是,選擇性IOC的實(shí)施標(biāo)準(zhǔn)目前尚未取得一致。筆者結(jié)合個(gè)人實(shí)施經(jīng)驗(yàn)認(rèn)為:常規(guī)IOC,可視個(gè)人習(xí)慣而定;選擇性IOC,當(dāng)遇及解剖結(jié)構(gòu)不清,或術(shù)者手術(shù)經(jīng)驗(yàn)不足時(shí),可選擇;拒絕IOC者,術(shù)中需嚴(yán)密注意解剖結(jié)構(gòu)。
6.解剖標(biāo)記定向技術(shù)與術(shù)中實(shí)時(shí)導(dǎo)航技術(shù) 無論是CVS還是IOC,在最初打開包裹膽管結(jié)構(gòu)和(或)膽囊床的腹膜時(shí),均存在發(fā)生IBDI的風(fēng)險(xiǎn):在任何離斷操作前明確膽管結(jié)構(gòu)是避免IBDI的根本途徑。為此,學(xué)者們提出了基于Rouvière溝[18]與Calot結(jié)[19]的解剖標(biāo)記定向技術(shù),并取得不錯(cuò)效果。但是,Calot結(jié)并不總是很容易找到,同時(shí)約有20%的病人Rouvière溝缺失。近年來,可實(shí)時(shí)顯示肝外膽道系統(tǒng)的近紅外熒光膽道顯影術(shù)(near-infrared fluorescence cholangiography,NIRF-C)逐漸被開發(fā)[20]。該技術(shù)通過靜脈注射吲哚菁綠,然后使用近紅外光源激發(fā)混有吲哚菁綠的膽汁發(fā)光成像。與傳統(tǒng)造影相比,NIRF-C無放射性暴露,不損傷膽管(無需開辟造影通道),不顯著增加手術(shù)時(shí)間及費(fèi)用(造影更快,費(fèi)用更低)。雖然因技術(shù)限制和有效證據(jù)缺乏,NIRF-C尚未能在臨床上得到廣泛使用,但其無輻射、實(shí)時(shí)、微創(chuàng)、經(jīng)濟(jì)、方便、安全的性質(zhì),使之可能成為膽道手術(shù)理想的術(shù)中導(dǎo)航技術(shù)。
任何一種技術(shù)均不應(yīng)孤立為預(yù)防IBDI的唯一方法,取長(zhǎng)補(bǔ)短,聯(lián)合使用方能最大限度避免IBDI。特別需要說明的是,人而非技術(shù)是決定IBDI的關(guān)鍵:初學(xué)者須在經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的老師指導(dǎo)下實(shí)施手術(shù),經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的醫(yī)師亦必須對(duì)之持認(rèn)真態(tài)度。
1.IBDI的診斷 膽管損傷的及時(shí)診斷與處理可顯著減少損傷修復(fù)后并發(fā)癥和遠(yuǎn)期膽管再狹窄的發(fā)生率。術(shù)中發(fā)現(xiàn)術(shù)區(qū)存在膽漏或“無法解釋”的管腔結(jié)構(gòu),或膽道造影顯示造影劑外漏,均提示可能存在膽管損傷。盡管如此,僅有1/2左右的IBDI能獲得術(shù)中診斷[21]。對(duì)于膽囊切除術(shù)后48 h內(nèi)出現(xiàn)寒戰(zhàn)高熱、腹痛腹脹、持續(xù)惡心嘔吐、黃疸等癥狀,或出現(xiàn)腹部壓痛、反跳痛等局限性甚至彌漫性腹膜炎體征的病人,需警惕膽管損傷的發(fā)生。由于上述癥狀和體征不具備特異性,常常為外科醫(yī)師所忽略或錯(cuò)誤解釋。膽管損傷也可在術(shù)后數(shù)月甚至數(shù)年出現(xiàn),以延遲性膽管狹窄為主要臨床表現(xiàn)。
影像學(xué)檢查對(duì)明確膽管損傷診斷,準(zhǔn)確評(píng)估損傷的部位、范圍和程度,指導(dǎo)進(jìn)一步治療具有重要價(jià)值。經(jīng)皮經(jīng)肝膽管造影(percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography,PTC)不僅能正確顯示損傷的近端膽管樹,同時(shí)具有通過膽道減壓治療損傷后膽管炎、引導(dǎo)術(shù)中肝門部膽管定位的價(jià)值。內(nèi)鏡下逆行膽胰管造影(endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography,ERCP)可清晰顯示連續(xù)性完整的膽管樹結(jié)構(gòu),檢查同時(shí)可利用支架或球囊擴(kuò)張治療膽汁漏和膽管狹窄。磁共振胰膽管成像(magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography,MRCP)作為一種非侵襲性的膽道顯像技術(shù),能提供PTC檢查所能提供的全部信息,逐漸成為評(píng)估膽管損傷新的首選方法[22]。
2.膽管損傷的分型 精準(zhǔn)評(píng)估病人膽管損傷的特征對(duì)選擇恰當(dāng)?shù)闹委煏r(shí)機(jī)和最佳的治療方法尤其重要。目前膽管損傷分型系統(tǒng)有多種,如Bismuth分型,Strasberg分型和Stewart-Way分型等[23]。Bismuth分型是最早提出的分型系統(tǒng),其根據(jù)損傷平面高低將膽管損傷分為5型,幫助外科醫(yī)師在實(shí)施膽道重建時(shí)選擇恰當(dāng)修復(fù)技術(shù)。但是,Bismuth分型主要針對(duì)損傷性膽管狹窄。特別地,作為開腹時(shí)代的產(chǎn)物,Bismuth分型并未包括常見的LC損傷類型,如膽囊床、迷走膽管、膽囊管殘端等小膽管膽瘺。針對(duì)此缺陷,Strasberg結(jié)合膽管損傷程度對(duì)Bismuth分型做了進(jìn)一步的完善,提出Strasberg分型。然而,Strasberg分型仍然沒有考慮到合并血管損傷的問題。對(duì)此,新的Stewart-Way分型根據(jù)膽管損傷嚴(yán)重程度及有無合并血管損傷將膽管損傷分為Ⅰ~Ⅳ型,并根據(jù)損傷平面分出A~D 4個(gè)亞型。該分型可能對(duì)膽管損傷后是否需要行肝臟切除術(shù)具有指導(dǎo)價(jià)值[24]。
筆者團(tuán)隊(duì)基于臨床決策將膽管損傷分為如下3型:Ⅰ型,迷走膽管、膽管側(cè)壁損傷;Ⅱ型,主要膽管橫斷性損傷,不伴血管損傷;Ⅲ型,合并肝動(dòng)脈或門靜脈損傷。其中Ⅰ型又分為Ⅰa型,通暢引流即可;Ⅰb型:?jiǎn)渭円鳠o效,需內(nèi)鏡干預(yù)。目前該方案仍在討論階段。
膽管損傷的處理是一項(xiàng)多模式的治療,包括外科手術(shù)、內(nèi)鏡治療及介入干預(yù),須根據(jù)病人一般情況及損傷的部位、程度和類型合理選擇。
1.治療時(shí)機(jī)的把握 對(duì)術(shù)中與術(shù)后早期(24 h內(nèi))發(fā)現(xiàn)的膽管損傷,因此時(shí)局部組織水腫和炎癥反應(yīng)較輕,重建修復(fù)相對(duì)容易且成功率高,遠(yuǎn)期再狹窄發(fā)生率低,通常主張即時(shí)修復(fù)。對(duì)術(shù)后24 h后發(fā)現(xiàn)的膽管損傷,早期修復(fù)抑或延期修復(fù)目前存在爭(zhēng)議。有學(xué)者認(rèn)為,早期修復(fù)與延期修復(fù)成功率相當(dāng)[25]。但也有學(xué)者認(rèn)為,早期修復(fù)雖不影響吻合口的通暢,卻增加了術(shù)后并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生率[26]。此外,對(duì)于早期修復(fù)與延期修復(fù)的定義,目前也尚未達(dá)成一致觀點(diǎn)。筆者認(rèn)為,對(duì)于術(shù)后24 h后發(fā)現(xiàn)的膽管損傷,如無明顯膽汁漏、膽汁性腹膜炎及腹腔感染存在,早期修復(fù)與延期修復(fù)的遠(yuǎn)期療效相當(dāng),但是早期修復(fù)縮短治療時(shí)間,降低總治療費(fèi)用;而存在上述情況者,則應(yīng)先充分引流,控制感染,改善病人一般情況。延期修復(fù)可提前至術(shù)后6周。
2.手術(shù)醫(yī)生的選擇 大量證據(jù)顯示,??漆t(yī)師實(shí)施確定性修復(fù)的成功率顯著高于非??漆t(yī)師,特別是造成IBDI的醫(yī)師,并且非??漆t(yī)師首次修復(fù)影響專科醫(yī)師再修復(fù)手術(shù)的成功率[27-28]。因此,對(duì)于術(shù)中發(fā)現(xiàn)的IBDI,術(shù)者應(yīng)及時(shí)請(qǐng)上級(jí)醫(yī)師協(xié)助,切不可繼續(xù)分離以加重?fù)p傷;若本中心技術(shù)力量不足,則應(yīng)先行置管引流并及時(shí)轉(zhuǎn)至大型醫(yī)學(xué)中心接受首次修復(fù)。
3.修復(fù)方式的選擇 膽管損傷的預(yù)后與首次修復(fù)時(shí)術(shù)式的選擇密切相關(guān)。①膽管空腸Roux-en-Y吻合術(shù)是目前最常用且療效最肯定的修復(fù)方式,適用于合并明顯組織缺損、難以對(duì)端吻合的膽管損傷。但是,膽管空腸吻合術(shù)改變了正常的膽汁流向,術(shù)后十二指腸潰瘍發(fā)生率增高,并且廢除了Oddi括約肌的功能,不可避免地增加反流性膽管炎甚至膽管癌的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。此外,膽管空腸吻合術(shù)修復(fù)失敗后的再處理也是一個(gè)棘手的問題。②膽管對(duì)端吻合術(shù)維持了正常的膽汁流向,同時(shí)保留了Oddi括約肌的功能,是最符合人體生理的術(shù)式。因此,對(duì)于圍手術(shù)期沒有發(fā)現(xiàn)廣泛組織缺損的損傷,初次修復(fù)均應(yīng)考慮膽管對(duì)端吻合術(shù)[29]。但是,該術(shù)式對(duì)手術(shù)技術(shù)及器材要求較高,且術(shù)后需放置T管至少6個(gè)月。③單純縫合修補(bǔ),適用于膽管輕度、新鮮損傷而無明顯缺損者,通常無需置入T管。④介入及內(nèi)鏡治療:主要用于Strasberg A/D型損傷,遠(yuǎn)期療效不確切,亦可用于術(shù)前控制膽汁漏及腹腔感染,改善肝功能。⑤肝切除術(shù),適用于難以修復(fù)重建的二級(jí)或二級(jí)以上膽管損傷,或膽管損傷合并局限性肝臟病變(肝萎縮、肝膿腫等),術(shù)前須評(píng)估未受累區(qū)域肝臟的代償功能。⑥肝移植術(shù)對(duì)于晚期并發(fā)嚴(yán)重膽汁性肝硬化病人,是一個(gè)可供的選擇。
近年來,隨著微創(chuàng)技術(shù)的進(jìn)一步成熟,腹腔鏡技術(shù)與機(jī)器人外科手術(shù)系統(tǒng)開始應(yīng)用于膽管損傷修復(fù),并取得令人滿意的近期和遠(yuǎn)期治療效果[30-31],有望成為IBDI修復(fù)的新趨勢(shì)。對(duì)于部分膽管側(cè)壁嚴(yán)重?fù)p傷病人,有學(xué)者采用圓韌帶進(jìn)行橫向重建[32]。短期隨訪結(jié)果顯示,此技術(shù)安全有效。目前其作者正在嘗試采用圓韌帶進(jìn)行膽管縱向重建,效果令人期待。該技術(shù)避免了傳統(tǒng)膽腸吻合術(shù)對(duì)正常膽腸生理結(jié)構(gòu)的破壞,對(duì)年輕病人具有特別重要的價(jià)值。
IBDI是一種發(fā)生率低但并不少見的醫(yī)源性損傷,膽囊切除術(shù)是其最常見的原因。膽管損傷不僅嚴(yán)重?fù)p害病人的身心健康,同時(shí)也造成了醫(yī)療資源的極大浪費(fèi)。術(shù)前仔細(xì)評(píng)估,術(shù)中精細(xì)操作可降低IBDI的發(fā)生率。大部分IBDI于術(shù)后發(fā)現(xiàn),應(yīng)用合適的影像學(xué)檢查,準(zhǔn)確評(píng)估損傷的部位、范圍和程度以制定相應(yīng)治療策略。準(zhǔn)確把握手術(shù)時(shí)機(jī),由經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的膽道專科醫(yī)生實(shí)施個(gè)性化治療,IBDI可取得良好的遠(yuǎn)期效果。一言以蔽之,IBDI是外科醫(yī)生不容忽視的問題,預(yù)防膽管損傷、改善病人長(zhǎng)期預(yù)后是膽道外科的永恒課題!
1 Shea JA,Berlin JA,Bachwich DR,et al.Indications for and outcomes of cholecystectomy:a comparison of the pre and postlaparoscopic eras.Ann Surg,1998,227:343-350.
2 Waage A,Nilsson M.Iatrogenic bile duct injury:a population-based study of 152 776 cholecystectomies in the Swedish Inpatient Registry.Arch Surg,2006,141:1207-1213.DOI:10.1001/archsurg.141.12.1207.
3 Rothman JP,Burcharth J,Pommergaard HC,et al.The quality of cholecystectomy in Denmark has improved over 6-year period.Langenbecks Arch Surg,2015,400:735-740.DOI:10.1007/s00423-015-1322-y.
4 Archer SB,Brown DW,Smith CD,et al.Bile duct injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy:results of a national survey.Ann Surg,2001,234:549-558.
5 Savader SJ,Lillemoe KD,Prescott CA,et al.Laparoscopic cholecystectomy-related bile duct injuries:a health and financial disaster.Ann Surg,1997,225:268-273.
6 Booij KAC,de Reuver PR,van Dieren S,et al.Long-term impact of bile duct injury on morbidity,mortality,quality of life,and work related limitations.Ann Surg,2017.DOI:10.1097/sla.0000000000002258.
7 Hariharan D,Psaltis E,Scholefield JH,et al.Quality of life and medico-legal implications following iatrogenic bile duct injuries.World J Surg,2017,41:90-99.DOI:10.1007/s00268-016-3677-9.
8 Johnston GW.Iatrogenic bile duct stricture:an avoidable surgical hazard?.Brit J Surg,1986,73:245-247.
9 Strasberg SM,Pucci MJ,Brunt LM,et al.Subtotal cholecystectomy-“fenestrating” vs “reconstituting” subtypes and the prevention of bile duct injury:definition of the optimal procedure in difficult operative conditions.J Am Coll Surg,2016,222:89-96.DOI:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.09.019.
10Strasberg SM,Brunt LM.Rationale and use of the critical view of safety in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.J Am Coll Surg,2010,211:132-138.DOI:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.02.053.
11Avgerinos C,Kelgiorgi D,Touloumis Z,et al.One thousand laparoscopic cholecystectomies in a single surgical unit using the “critical view of safety” technique.J Gastrointest Surg,2009,13:498-503.DOI:10.1007/s11605-008-0748-8.
12Booij KA,de Reuver PR,Nijsse B,et al.Insufficient safety measures reported in operation notes of complicated laparoscopic cholecystectomies.Surgery,2014,155:384-389.DOI:10.1016/j.surg.2013.10.010.
13Nijssen MA,Schreinemakers JM,Meyer Z,et al.Complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy:a video evaluation study of whether the critical view of safety was reached.World J Surg,2015,39:1798-1803.DOI:10.1007/s00268-015-2993-9.
14Abbasoglu O,Tekant Y,Alper A,et al.Prevention and acute management of biliary injuries during laparoscopic cholecystectomy:expert consensus statement.Ulus Cerrahi Derg,2016,32:300-305.DOI:10.5152/UCD.2016.3683.
15Stefanidis D,Chintalapudi N,Anderson-Montoya B,et al.How often do surgeons obtain the critical view of safety during laparoscopic cholecystectomy?.Surg Endosc,2017,31:142-146.DOI:10.1007/s00464-016-4943-5.
16Rystedt JML,Tingstedt B,Montgomery F,et al.Routine intraoperative cholangiography during cholecystectomy is a cost-effective approach when analysing the cost of iatrogenic bile duct injuries.HPB,2017.DOI:10.1016/j.hpb.2017.06.004.
17Tornqvist B,Stromberg C,Akre O,et al.Selective intraoperative cholangiography and risk of bile duct injury during cholecystectomy.Brit J Surg,2015,102:952-958.DOI:10.1002/bjs.9832.
18Hugh TB.New strategies to prevent laparoscopic bile duct injury--surgeons can learn from pilots.Surgery,2002,132:826-835.DOI:10.1067/msy.2002.127681.
19Kunasani R,Kohli H.Significance of the cystic node in preventing major bile duct injuries during laparoscopic cholecystectomy:a technical marker.J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A,2003,13:321-323.
20Ankersmit M,van Dam DA,van Rijswijk AS,et al.Fluorescent imaging with indocyanine green during laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients at increased risk of bile duct injury.Surg Innov,2017,24:245-252.DOI:10.1177/1553350617690309.
21Nuzzo G,Giuliante F,Giovannini I,et al. Bile duct injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy:results of an Italian national survey on 56 591 cholecystectomies.Arch Surg,2005,140:986-992.
22Chaudhary A,Negi SS,Puri SK,et al.Comparison of magnetic resonance cholangiography and percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography in the evaluation of bile duct strictures after cholecystectomy.Brit J Surg,2002,89:433-436.DOI:10.1046/j.0007-1323.2002.02066.x.
23Chun K.Recent classifications of the common bile duct injury.Korean J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg,2014,18:69-72.DOI:10.14701/kjhbps.2014.18.3.69.
24Bektas H,Schrem H,Winny M,et al.Surgical treatment and outcome of iatrogenic bile duct lesions after cholecystectomy and the impact of different clinical classification systems.Brit J Surg,2007,94:1119-1127.DOI:10.1002/bjs.5752.
25Perera MT,Silva MA,Hegab B,et al.Specialist early and immediate repair of post-laparoscopic cholecystectomy bile duct injuries is associated with an improved long-term outcome.Ann Surg,2011,253:553-560.DOI:10.1097/SLA.0b013e318208fad3.
26Dominguez-Rosado I,Sanford DE,Liu J,et al.Timing of surgical repair after bile duct injury impacts postoperative complications but not anastomotic patency.Ann Surg,2016,264:544-553.DOI:10.1097/sla.0000000000001868.
27Flum D,Cheadle A,Prela C,et al.Bile duct injury during cholecystectomy and survival in medicare beneficiaries.JAMA,2003,290:2168-2173.
28de Reuver PR,Grossmann I,Busch OR,et al.Referral pattern and timing of repair are risk factors for complications after reconstructive surgery for bile duct injury.Ann Surg,2007,245:763-770.DOI:10.1097/01.sla.0000252442.91839.44.
29de Reuver PR,Busch OR,Rauws EA,et al.Long-term results of a primary end-to-end anastomosis in peroperative detected bile duct injury.J Gastrointest Surg,2007,11:296-302.DOI:10.1007/s11605-007-0087-1.
30Dokmak S,Amharar N,Aussilhou B,et al.Laparoscopic repair of post-cholecystectomy bile duct injury:an advance in surgical management.J Gastrointest Surg,2017,21:1368-1372.DOI:10.1007/s11605-017-3400-7.
31Giulianotti PC,Quadri P,Durgam S,et al.Reconstruction/repair of iatrogenic biliary injuries:Is the robot offering a new option? Short clinical report.Ann Surg,2017.DOI:10.1097/SLA.0000000000002343.
32Dokmak S,Aussilhou B,Ragot E,et al.Reconstruction of bile duct injury and defect with the round ligament.J Gastrointest Surg,2017.DOI:10.1007/s11605-017-3485-z.
Iatrogenicbileductinjuries:theAchilles’Heelofcholecystectomy
LiangTingbo,SuWei,MaTao,BaiXueli.
DepartmentofHepatobiliaryandPancreaticSurgery,theSecondAffiliatedHospital,ZhejiangUniversitySchoolofMedicine,KeyLaboratoryofPancreaticDiseaseofZhejiangProvince,Hangzhou310009,China
LiangTingbo,Email:liangtingbo@zju.edu.cn
Iatrogenic bile duct injuries (IBDI) continue to be a major concern in open and laparoscopic cholecystectomy.They have profound implications for patients,medical personnel and healthcare providers due to significant morbidity and mortality,high rates of litigation and raised healthcare expenditure.Misidentification of the biliary system is the major cause of IBDI.Precision assessment preoperatively and secure identification intraoperatively can lessen and even avoid these injuries.Critical view of safety,intraoperative cholangiography,anatomic landmark-based intraoperative navigation and near-infrared fluorescence cholangiography are useful methods of targets identification.Once IBDI occur,early diagnosis produces far-reaching effects on prognosis.Imaging examinations are invaluable in postoperative diagnosis,which makes up over half of the cases.Various classifications have been established to guide the mode of intervention.If biliary injury is recognized intraoperatively,reconstruction should be undertaken immediately.Otherwise,surgical repair should be performed before sepsis or after sepsis is controlled adequately.A specialist surgeon,instead of the IBDI surgeon,is recommended to perform the primary definitive repair.The Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy is the most widely used procedure for major injuries and has been shown to provide favorable long-term outcomes.Percutaneous and endoscopic interventions are useful in draining bile collections and used in some minor injuries with uncertain efficacy.Recently,minimally invasive techniques,including laparoscopic and robotic surgery have been applied to IBDI reconstruction.And preserving innate physiological structure obtains increasing attention.
Iatrogenic bile duct injuries; Cholecystectomy; Intraoperative complications; Prevention; Diagnosis; Therapeutics
國家重點(diǎn)基礎(chǔ)研究發(fā)展計(jì)劃項(xiàng)目(973計(jì)劃,2014CB542101);國家自然科學(xué)基金面上項(xiàng)目(81472212);國家衛(wèi)生和計(jì)劃生育委員會(huì)公益性行業(yè)科研專項(xiàng)子項(xiàng)目(201502014)
310009 杭州,浙江大學(xué)醫(yī)學(xué)院附屬第二醫(yī)院肝膽胰外科 浙江省胰腺病研究重點(diǎn)實(shí)驗(yàn)室
梁廷波,Email:liangtingbo@zju.edu.cn
R657.4;R619+.5
A
10.3969/j.issn.1003-5591.2017.05.001
2017-08-10)