• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Operative complications and economic outcomes of cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis

    2019-02-12 12:58:34ChristopherRiceKrishnamurthyVaishnaviCeliaChaoDanielJupiterAugustSchaefferWhitneyJensonLanceGriffinWilliamMileski
    World Journal of Gastroenterology 2019年48期

    Christopher P Rice, Krishnamurthy B Vaishnavi, Celia Chao, Daniel Jupiter, August B Schaeffer,Whitney R Jenson, Lance W Griffin, William J Mileski

    Abstract

    Key words: Acute cholecystitis; Tokyo guidelines; Cholecystectomy; Complications;Delayed cholecystectomy

    INTRODUCTION

    Recent recommendations for early or same admission (SA) cholecystectomy[1-8]have become standard practice based mainly on a shorter hospital stay and thus a presumed economic benefit[9]. However, patients who present with acute cholecystitis are a heterogeneous population and for some patients, emergent cholecystectomy may result in complications that might be mitigated if the procedure were delayed.The Tokyo Guidelines (TG) were developed to guide the treatment of acute cholecystitis and to use clinical parameters at presentation to predict risk of complications associated with disease severity. TG defines the criteria for a clinical diagnosis of acute cholecystitis and disease severity grading[10]. The guidelines, first published in 2007, have been revised in 2013 and most recently in 2018. The grading system for TG13 is the same as TG18: Mild cholecystitis (Grade 1) refers to acute cholecystitis in a healthy patient with mild inflammatory changes in the gallbladder,fever and or elevated white blood cell count (WBC), and no organ dysfunction.Moderate cholecystitis (Grade 2) is associated with complaints > 72 h, a WBC ≥ 18K,signs of marked local inflammation (e.g., gangrenous or emphysematous cholecystitis,pericholecystic or hepatic abscess, biliary peritonitis) or a palpable tender mass in the right upper quadrant of the abdomen. Severe cholecystitis (Grade 3) is defined by concurrent organ system dysfunction. TG13/18 severity grading has been shown to correlate with hospital length of stay, conversion to open cholecystectomy, and higher morbidity and mortality[10].

    The World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES)[1]acknowledges that there are no validated clinical scores to guide clinicians for the evaluation of surgical risk for early operative intervention of acute calculus cholecystitis. For example, one criticism of the TG is that either drainage or cholecystectomy can be performed for severity Grade 2[11], without specific practice guidelines indicating which therapeutic option is better.Nonetheless, the TG grading correlates with morbidity and mortality[10,12]. Further validating the preoperative value of TG grading, Ambeet al[13]demonstrated that increasing severity Tokyo grades significantly correlated worse disease with histologic criteria.

    Using the TG severity of the disease grading system, we compared the outcomes of patients operated on during the SAvsdelayed. Since patients with a higher grade of disease (Grades 2 and 3) are expected to have a greater rate of complications and longer length of hospital stay (compared to Grade 1), we hypothesized that the economic benefit of early cholecystectomy in the setting of complications would be negated.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS

    Under an Institutional Review Board-approved protocol, we retrospectively reviewed 2118 medical charts of all patients who underwent a cholecystectomy over an 8.5-year period (February 2010 to August 2018) at the University of Texas Medical Branch(UTMB Health) - a tertiary referral center located in Galveston, Texas. Patient information was retrieved using the UTMB Health databases for acute care surgery,billing, and Revenue Cycle Operations. Patient medical charts were reviewed directly from UTMB Health's electronic medical records (EMR, Epic Hyperspace 2017, Epic Systems Corporation). A total of 26 faculty surgeons performed the cholecystectomies during this time period.

    Inclusion criteria for each acutely ill patient consisted of a diagnosis of acute cholecystitis upon presentation to any UTMB Health emergency department with admission or direct admit to the hospital. All patients underwent a cholecystectomy performed either during their index admission (i.e., SA) or electively after presenting with acute disease (i.e., delayed cholecystectomy). For comparison only, we also abstracted the charts of all patients who underwent an elective cholecystectomy (nonacute) for a diagnosis of sub-acute conditions (e.g., chronic cholecystitis (biliary colic),cholelithiasis, biliary dyskinesia, porcelain gallbladder, or gallbladder polyp).Exclusion criteria were acutely ill patients without a diagnosis of acute cholecystitis and patients < 18 years of age. We also excluded 27 patients who had a diagnosis of acute cholecystitis but underwent preoperative cholecystotomy tube placement because these patients were deemed to be poor operative candidates initially and were temporized with a drainage procedure first.

    We collected information on baseline patient characteristics including demographics, insurance status, comorbidities, diagnoses, health behaviors, dates of presentation, body temperature at presentation, hospital lengths of stay, laboratory values at presentation, complications. Outcome calculations were rates of cholecystectomy on index admission, complication rates, readmission rates, and charges.

    We identified data regarding charges incurred for each case from UTMB Health Revenue Cycle Operations using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes,International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes, medical record numbers of the 1882 patients involved in the study, and the operative dates between April 2013 to August 2018 (hospital charges prior to April 2013 were not activated in our electronic medical record system). The CPT codes used were 47562, 47563, 47600, 47605, 47480,47564, 47490, and 47570, which represent laparoscopic and open cholecystectomies(with or without an intraoperative cholangiogram), percutaneous or open cholecystostomies (with or without exploration, drainage, or removal of calculus), and cholecystenterostomies, respectively. The ICD-10 included were K81.9, K81.2, K81.1,K81.0, K80.80, K80.60, K80.50, K80.44, K80.20, K80.18, K80.12, K80.10, and K80.00 along with the corresponding ICD-9 (that matched the aforementioned ICD-10) codes.These ICD codes represent combinations of acute and chronic, obstructive and nonobstructive cholecystitis, cholelithiasis, cholangitis, and choledocholithiasis. All charges (which include any admission, clinic visit, urgent care visit, related procedures) were captured for each patient after April 2013 (i.e., we were unable to obtain charge data for 23.5% of the cohort).

    Patients were diagnosed with acute cholecystitis and stratified by severity using the latest TG18 criteria[10]. The diagnosis is based on local signs of inflammation (e.g.,Murphy's sign or right upper quadrant mass, pain, or tenderness), systemic signs of inflammation (e.g., fever or elevated WBC), and characteristic imaging findings. TG18 categorizes acute cholecystitis by Grades 1, 2, and 3 representing mild, moderate, and severe, respectively.

    Statistical analysis

    We conducted our evaluation by means of descriptive statistics using univariate and bivariate analyses of continuous and categorical variables. Bivariate comparison between the groups was analyzed using the Student'st-tests, one-way ANOVA, Chisquared tests, and Fisher's exact tests, where appropriate. We constructed a multivariate model on the covariates potentially predictive of complications with aPvalue on bivariate comparison of ≤ 0.2. APvalue of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Patient data was exported into a comma-separated value format to be imported in to R for analysis; all analyses were executed in the R statistical package(R, Developmental, Core, Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing 2015; available at http://www.R-project.org).

    RESULTS

    Five hundred fifty-four patients met criteria and were included in the study. Four hundred eighty-six (87.7%) underwent an SA cholecystectomy while 68 patients(12.3%) received delayed operative management. Table 1 shows the demographics and patient characteristics of the two groups. Age, gender, race, ethnicity, body mass index, preexisting comorbidities, alcohol use, smoking status, and rates of planned or convert-to-open cholecystectomy were not significantly different between the SA and delayed cholecystectomy groups.

    The cohort was stratified by the severity of acute cholecystitis based on the Tokyo grading system (Table 2). There were no differences in severity of disease between the SA and the delayed cholecystectomy groups.

    Complication rates were significantly increased for SA compared to Delayed cholecystectomy for a diagnosis of acute cholecystitis (18.5%vs4.4%, respectively,P=0.004; Table 3). Although complications in mild (Grade 1) and severe (Grade 3) acute cholecystitis were not significant, patients with moderate disease (Grade 2)experienced significantly more complications during SA compared to the delayed group (16.1%vs0.0%,P< 0.001). When we compared the complication rate of patients undergoing a delayed cholecystectomy, we found that the postoperative complication rate was similar to the rate for elective cholecystectomy for chronic cholecystitis (4.4%vs6.2%,P= 0.557). As expected, the overall complication rate of acute cholecystitis(combining both SA and delayed) was significantly greater than that of an elective cholecystectomy (16.8%vs6.2%,P< 0.001).

    Table 3 also shows the types of complications. A significantly increased rate of subtotal cholecystectomy was performed for the SA patients compared to delayed(7.6%vs0.0%,P= 0.016). Since a subtotal cholecystectomy was not the intended operation, we considered the performance of a subtotal cholecystectomy as a complication. Subtotal cholecystectomy, which is essentially a drainage procedure,was only performed in the SA group, suggesting that subtotal cholecystectomy is a surrogate for operative difficulty. A total of 37 patients underwent subtotal cholecystectomies; eight patients were Grade 1, 27 were Grade 2, and two patients were Grade 3. If we excluded subtotal cholecystectomies as a “true” complication, the complication rate was still statistically significant: 13.4%vs4.4% (SAvsdelayed,respectively,P= 0.03). Mortality rates among all patients were 0.6%vs0.0% for SA and delayed, respectively. All three patients who died had cholecystectomy within 24 h of admission from the emergency department. The first death occurred in a 90-yearold with Grade 3 disease. The second patient had Grade 1 disease and a history of congestive heart failure. The third had Grade 2 disease and unrecognized cardiac ischemia postoperatively. Notably, there were no common bile duct injuries in either group (Table 3). All other complication types identified were similar between the groups, including bile leak, retained stone, cholangitis, biliary stenosis, infection,hernia, and complications involving the cardiovascular, respiratory, or gastrointestinal systems.

    The time between initial admission and operative intervention for the delayed cholecystectomy group was 48.3 ± 76.3 d (Table 4). Postoperative readmission rates were similar between the groups (22.2%vs21.2%,P= 0.854). In comparison to the delayed cases, the SA group had significantly longer total lengths of hospital stay (3.8± 5.5vs1.6 ± 2.0,P< 0.001).

    SA cholecystectomy hospital charges were higher compared to Delayed intervention for acute cholecystitis ($44500 ± $59000vs$35300 ± $16700,P= 0.019,Table 4). Hospital charges for elective cholecystectomies performed on chronic conditions were the lowest at $23000 ± $10300 (P< 0.001, 1-way ANOVA comparing all three).

    There were no differences in complication rates based on insurance status for SA(17.0% insuredvs14.1% uninsured,P= 0.127) or Delayed cholecystectomy (0.7%insuredvs0% uninsured,P= 1). As expected, the vast majority of delayed cholecystectomies (97.1%) were insured compared to a lower number for SA patients(71.2%;P< 0.001).

    Table 1 Demographics and patient characteristics

    A logistic regression analysis was performed to determine if there are any independent variables that can predict a higher risk of complications. We stratified disease severity by TG13/18 and found that complication rates were only significantly different with the Grade 2 subset (Table 5). The odds of any complication occurring was 2.1x greater in patients with Grade 2 disease compared to those with Grade 1(95%CI: 1.2-3.7,P= 0.007, Table 5). The odds of any complication occurring in Grade 2 or 3 was 2.3x greater in males compared to female patients (95%CI: 1.0-5.1,P= 0.047).

    Risk analysis (Table 6) of developing a complication in the SAvsdelayed groups demonstrated a relative risk of 4.2x (95%CI: 1.4-12.9) and attributable risk of 14.1%(95%CI: 4.6-23.6). Number needed to harm (NNH) analysis indicated that, among eight patients (95%CI: 5.0-12.3) with acute cholecystitis undergoing SA cholecystectomy, one patient will suffer a complication. Notably, the attributable and NNH for Grades 2 or 3 patients were 28.3% (95%CI: 12.3-44.4) and 4 (95%CI: 2.9-4.6),respectively.

    DISCUSSION

    Historically, the timing of performing cholecystectomy for a diagnosis of acute cholecystitis has been very controversial. A Cochrane systematic review with metaanalysis of six randomized clinical trials (1998-2003) compared earlyvsdelayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with acute cholecystitis and concluded no significant difference between the groups with regards to immediate postoperative mortality, bile duct injuries, other serious adverse events, or rates of conversion to open cholecystectomy[14]. The only significant clinical outcome in favor of early cholecystectomy was a shorter hospital length of stay by four days. Multiple publications support early (SA) over delayed (interval) cholecystectomy based on equivalent morbidity and mortality, and an overall better economic profile[1-8,15-17].However, the data from our institution over the past 8.5 years show that for the subset of Grade 2 patients, there is greater risk of morbidity and mortality with SA cholecystectomy. When a complication does occur, we found a concomitant longer length of hospital stay with an associated increase in hospital costs. When Grade 2 patients undergo delayed cholecystectomy, the rate of complications decreases to thatof elective cholecystectomies for subacute diagnoses (e.g., biliary colic, gallbladders polyps). Due to the small sample size in Grade 3 patients, the logistic regression analysis (Table 5) did not identify Grade 3 patients at risk for greater complications and death when comparing operative timing. Although we cannot make definitive statements about Grade 3 patients in our study, multiple investigators with larger sample sizes do validate the highest morbidity and mortality for the highest grade of disease severity[12,18,19].

    Table 2 Stratification by disease severity using 2013/18 Tokyo guidelines, n (%)

    Hernandezet al[18]validated TG13 grading among a cohort of 443 patients at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN. The odds of postoperative complications For TG grade 2 and 3 were 1.8 times and 4.9 times the risk compared to grade 1 patients. Their finding for Grade 2 patients is similar to our study where Grade 2 patients had an odds ratio of 2.1 for complications compared to Grade 1 patients. Chenget al[20]compared complication rates between 103 patients with acute cholecystitis of either Tokyo Grades 1, 2, or 3. Similar to our work, they noticed an increased surgical complication rate in Grade 2 (25.0%) compared to Grades 1 (5.6%) and 3 (0.0%). The low complication rate for Grade 3 patients in both Chen and our data are due to low sample size. Also in agreement with our findings, the literature has demonstrated an excess risk of complications in males undergoing cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis[21-23]although the reason for the association between gender and complication risk with cholecystectomy remains unclear.

    In our study, among the SA cholecystectomy patients, the mean time from admission to operation was 2.2 ± 14.2 d, with an overall mortality rate of 0.6%. In a recent population-based study the 30-d operative mortality for all cholecystectomies(elective and emergent) performed for gallstone disease was 0.15% (72 deaths out ofn= 47912 patients)[24]. They report that the risk of death for “acute” surgery compared with “planned” surgery was 10-fold higher (95%CI: 2.41-41.95). Patients with perioperative complications were 3.3-fold higher (95%CI: 1.74-6.15) for risk of death.Furthermore, patients between ages 50-70 and > 70 had a 2.12 (95%CI: 0.67-6.74) and a 7.04 (95%CI: 2.23-22.26) fold increase risk of death compared to patients < age 50,respectively. Among the three patients in our study who died postoperatively, twowere in their 5th decade of life and one patient was in the 9th decade of life.

    Table 3 Complication rates and types, n (%)

    In a study by Zafaret al[25]using Nationwide Inpatient Sample data from 2005-2009,a multivariate analysis demonstrated that the odds of complications and death increased when cholecystectomy was performed between days 2-5 [mortality OR 1.26(95%CI: 1.00-1.58)] and 6-10 d [mortality OR = 1.93 (1.38-2.69)] after admission,compared to days 0-1 (OR = 1). Based on this large dataset of withn> 95500 patients,the authors determined that the optimal time to perform cholecystectomy was less than 48 h, and that if the timing exceeds 48 h, the delay would result in highermorbidity and mortality. Guttet al[16]found that cholecystectomy within 24 h (mean 0.6 d) of admission had the lowest morbidity compared to delayed cholecystectomy 7-45 d (mean 25 d) after presentation; mortality was equivalent with one death in each group (0.33%). However, Brookset al[26]did not find an association between the timing of SA operation (0 d, 1 d, 2 d, 3 d and ≥ 4 d from admission) with 30-d morbidity and mortality after risk adjustment when analyzing data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database; this result may be due to a smaller sample size compared with Zafar's dataset. Although our cohort of patients generally underwent cholecystectomy close to the 48-h time-frame, it is noteworthy that all three deaths were operated on within 24 hours of admission. The mortality rates in Zafar's study were 0.2%, 0.6% and 1.7% for 0-1 d, 2-5 d and 6-10 d,respectively. Interestingly, while Zafaret al[25]advocate early cholecystectomy within 48 hours of admission, they note that the mortality rate for day 0 was higher at 0.42%;they hypothesized that some patients may be under-resuscitated at day 0 and therefore at higher risk for death.

    Table 4 Hospital length of stay, postoperative readmissions, and charges

    In a large retrospective study from Japan and Taiwan, the 30-d mortality rate for among 2947 patients undergoing primary cholecystectomy for TG grades 1, 2, and 3 of acute cholecystitis were 0.3%, 0.4%, and 4.1%, respectively[19]. Josephet al[27]presented contemporary data (n= 857) from a single institution and noted no mortality in Tokyo Grade 1 patients, 8 (0.5%) deaths in Grade 2 patients and 6 (1.8%) deaths in Grade 3 patients. Their patient population is a heterogeneous mix, with only 51% who had an elevated WBC and 45% with no ultrasonographic signs of acute cholecystitis. They included a significant number of patients categorized as having “acute on chronic”disease, who do not meet the TG clinical criteria for acute cholecystitis. Although their thesis was that the Tokyo criteria were not sensitive for acute cholecystitis, the inclusion a significant number of patients with normal WBC implies that they had a larger denominator in their reported mortality rate. The mortality rate would be higher with a smaller denominator (if only patients who meet the TG criteria for acute cholecystitis were included). The increase in death rate among the SA group in our study was not statistically significant when compared to the delayed group due to our small sample size; however, postoperative death for a benign condition concerns us sufficiently to revisit the optimal timing of surgical intervention for acute cholecystitis.

    To manage “difficult” gallbladders, the WSES recommends subtotal cholecystectomy especially in the acute setting or a delayed cholecystectomy 45 d from symptom onset. We defined a delayed cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis as a procedure occurring after discharge electively after stabilization of acute disease.However, the literature does not have an agreed upon definition of a “delayed”cholecystectomy and ranges from 1 d to 6 wk after symptom onset, diagnosis, or index presentation. On average, patients in this study received a delayed, elective cholecystectomy 48.3 d from index presentation of acute disease. Our work supports the 2016 WSES recommendations for subtotal cholecystectomies and delayed time frame[1].

    A limitation of this study is the retrospective nature of our data; there is selectionbias especially for Grade 3 patients, where the small sample size precluded definitive conclusions. Since we did not include preoperative percutaneous cholecystostomy tubes, we likely excluded a significant number of Grade 3 patients from this study.Additionally, hospital charge data for the SA and delayed represent 78.4% and 69.1%of the total patients, respectively. Financial comparisons were made on the majority of patients, but would be more reliable if we could obtain all of the data. Finally, this study represents the experience at one academic, teaching institution with 26 faculty members performing the cholecystectomies. The faculty members are board-certified general surgeons with competency for laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy; only a few self-identify as having specific hepatobiliary or advanced laparoscopic expertise.We have a general surgery training program and all surgeons and surgical residents on these cases have earned Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery-certification. The applicability of this study may not be generalizable in all practice settings.

    Table 5 Logistic regression analysis

    Our work supports the 2018 TG for the management of Grades 1 and 2 acute cholecystitis[10]. Specifically, if a patient has significant co-morbidities and/or is a high-risk surgical candidate, conservative management with antibiotics, fluid resuscitation, and pain control should be followed by elective cholecystectomy. If thepatient does not improve clinically with conservative management, percutaneous cholecystotomy can be performed to drain the septic source. In this study, we have compared the clinical and economic outcomes of SA cholecystectomy with delayed cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Early cholecystectomy for Tokyo Grades 2 and 3 patients should be considered with care. The risks of complications are higher in these patient groups, leading to greater cost. Future studies are needed to confirm our findings and also should focus on strategies to avoid mortality in these high-risk groups.

    Table 6 Relative risk, attributable risk, and number needed to harm analysis

    In conclusion, patients presenting with acute cholecystitis Tokyo Grade 2 developed more complications and incur increased charges when undergoing SA cholecystectomy compared to a delayed approach. This data supports a selective approach to surgery for patients with acute cholecystitis; Tokyo Grade 2 patients have a lower complication rate when cholecystectomy is delayed.

    ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS

    Research results

    SA cholecystectomy patients had an overall complication rate of 18.5% compared to Delayed cholecystectomy patients with a complication rate of 4.4% (P= 0.004). For the Tokyo Grade 2 patients (moderate disease), SA and delayed cholecystectomy complication rates were 16%vs0%, respectively (P< 0.001). SA cholecystectomy hospital charges were higher compared to Delayed cholecystectomy (P= 0.019) due to an increase in cost from the management of complications. There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes for Tokyo Grade 1 patients (mild disease). We did not have sufficient numbers of patients with Tokyo Grade 3(severe disease) for meaningful comparisons.

    Research conclusions

    Our study demonstrates that SA cholecystectomy patients have higher complication rates with associated higher costs. The data supports a selective approach to operative intervention for acute cholecystitis; Tokyo Grade 2 patients have a lower complication rate when cholecystectomy is Delayed. Risk factors for complications include Tokyo Grade 2 severity of disease. In a risk analysis, among eight patients with acute cholecystitis undergoing SA cholecystectomy, one patient will suffer a complication.

    Research perspectives

    This study suggests that SA cholecystectomy does not always afford an economic advantage,especially if there are complications. Future studies are needed to confirm our findings since this study is limited because the data was collected retrospectively from a single institution.

    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

    We thank Eileen Figueroa for her assistance with manuscript preparation, and Chad Allen and Winston Chan for their assistance with data acquisition. This paper was presented, in part, at the Surgical Forum in San Francisco on October 30, 2019, and at the 77thAnnual Meeting of the AAST/4thWorld Trauma Congress in San Diego on September 27, 2018.

    少妇丰满av| 国产成人精品在线电影| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 久久精品夜色国产| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 欧美另类一区| 国产精品秋霞免费鲁丝片| 久久久午夜欧美精品| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 91精品一卡2卡3卡4卡| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 免费黄色在线免费观看| 国内精品宾馆在线| 中文字幕av电影在线播放| a级毛片免费高清观看在线播放| 美女国产视频在线观看| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 欧美性感艳星| av又黄又爽大尺度在线免费看| 日本vs欧美在线观看视频| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄| 超色免费av| 人成视频在线观看免费观看| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花| 伦精品一区二区三区| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 午夜影院在线不卡| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区蜜桃 | 日日撸夜夜添| 超色免费av| 国产永久视频网站| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线| 一个人看视频在线观看www免费| av视频免费观看在线观看| 久久精品国产a三级三级三级| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 天天影视国产精品| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 看免费成人av毛片| 成人综合一区亚洲| 在线观看人妻少妇| 蜜桃久久精品国产亚洲av| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| a级毛色黄片| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| 丰满少妇做爰视频| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 亚洲av电影在线观看一区二区三区| 色哟哟·www| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 亚洲一级一片aⅴ在线观看| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线 | 我的女老师完整版在线观看| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 蜜臀久久99精品久久宅男| 22中文网久久字幕| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看| 你懂的网址亚洲精品在线观看| 久久精品人人爽人人爽视色| 国产成人一区二区在线| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 午夜免费观看性视频| 欧美97在线视频| 国产高清三级在线| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看 | 国产一级毛片在线| 国产成人精品一,二区| 精品一区二区三卡| 超碰97精品在线观看| 一级黄片播放器| 午夜激情福利司机影院| 在线观看www视频免费| 国产免费视频播放在线视频| 男女国产视频网站| 欧美国产精品一级二级三级| 一级片'在线观看视频| 日韩av免费高清视频| 一边亲一边摸免费视频| 国产精品免费大片| 97在线视频观看| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 欧美国产精品一级二级三级| 一级毛片电影观看| av一本久久久久| 日韩强制内射视频| 在线观看国产h片| 黄片播放在线免费| 欧美日韩视频高清一区二区三区二| 久久97久久精品| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 卡戴珊不雅视频在线播放| 嫩草影院入口| 国产免费视频播放在线视频| av卡一久久| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 嫩草影院入口| videossex国产| 国产精品久久久久久av不卡| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 精品久久久精品久久久| 99久久精品国产国产毛片| 国产视频内射| 99热6这里只有精品| 亚洲欧美日韩另类电影网站| 性色av一级| 少妇人妻 视频| 亚洲精品日韩av片在线观看| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 色婷婷av一区二区三区视频| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 久久久久久伊人网av| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 97超视频在线观看视频| av免费在线看不卡| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 99热网站在线观看| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 亚洲综合色网址| √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 色视频在线一区二区三区| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 久久久久精品性色| 少妇 在线观看| 日本黄色片子视频| 欧美成人午夜免费资源| 新久久久久国产一级毛片| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 中国美白少妇内射xxxbb| 一本一本久久a久久精品综合妖精 国产伦在线观看视频一区 | 国产在线视频一区二区| 黄色一级大片看看| 国产探花极品一区二区| 伦理电影大哥的女人| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久| 天堂中文最新版在线下载| 22中文网久久字幕| 国产一区二区三区av在线| 日韩伦理黄色片| 97超视频在线观看视频| 亚洲内射少妇av| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 91在线精品国自产拍蜜月| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 韩国av在线不卡| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 熟女av电影| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 欧美日韩成人在线一区二区| 少妇人妻 视频| xxx大片免费视频| 中国国产av一级| 男男h啪啪无遮挡| 久久久久网色| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 十八禁网站网址无遮挡| 母亲3免费完整高清在线观看 | 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 久久99热6这里只有精品| 内地一区二区视频在线| 赤兔流量卡办理| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 精品国产露脸久久av麻豆| 久久热精品热| 亚洲熟女精品中文字幕| 日日撸夜夜添| 亚洲精品国产色婷婷电影| av在线播放精品| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看| 久久精品国产亚洲网站| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| 国产乱人偷精品视频| 精品一区二区三卡| 国产欧美亚洲国产| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| av在线观看视频网站免费| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 九色成人免费人妻av| 午夜免费鲁丝| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 成人二区视频| av在线老鸭窝| 麻豆成人av视频| 免费观看av网站的网址| 欧美亚洲 丝袜 人妻 在线| 亚洲av男天堂| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx在线观看| 中文字幕av电影在线播放| 久久久久网色| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频| 国产精品人妻久久久久久| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 午夜日本视频在线| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 夫妻午夜视频| 王馨瑶露胸无遮挡在线观看| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区国产| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 久久99蜜桃精品久久| 久久久久久伊人网av| 国产亚洲最大av| 亚洲国产最新在线播放| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 久久av网站| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 我的女老师完整版在线观看| 国产高清国产精品国产三级| 99九九在线精品视频| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 成人国语在线视频| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 亚洲欧美中文字幕日韩二区| 亚洲不卡免费看| 亚洲精品一二三| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 少妇被粗大猛烈的视频| 成人影院久久| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 女的被弄到高潮叫床怎么办| 亚洲性久久影院| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说| 狂野欧美激情性xxxx在线观看| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 麻豆成人av视频| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线 | 18禁观看日本| 亚洲中文av在线| 亚洲av男天堂| 精品一区二区三区视频在线| 男女无遮挡免费网站观看| 大话2 男鬼变身卡| 欧美日韩在线观看h| 久久久国产一区二区| 插阴视频在线观看视频| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说 | 26uuu在线亚洲综合色| 久久ye,这里只有精品| 中文乱码字字幕精品一区二区三区| 熟妇人妻不卡中文字幕| 熟女av电影| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 丝袜美足系列| 在线观看www视频免费| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 精品国产一区二区久久| 免费大片18禁| 97精品久久久久久久久久精品| 亚洲国产毛片av蜜桃av| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 最黄视频免费看| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 欧美xxxx性猛交bbbb| 美女中出高潮动态图| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在| 少妇丰满av| 久久青草综合色| 日本黄色片子视频| 亚洲精品一二三| 美女大奶头黄色视频| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 美女内射精品一级片tv| 国产无遮挡羞羞视频在线观看| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 午夜福利网站1000一区二区三区| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| 一二三四中文在线观看免费高清| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在| 七月丁香在线播放| 免费观看的影片在线观看| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区 | 全区人妻精品视频| 日韩中字成人| 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| 国产乱来视频区| 成人午夜精彩视频在线观看| 男女边摸边吃奶| 国产精品三级大全| 人妻少妇偷人精品九色| 亚洲国产毛片av蜜桃av| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 午夜91福利影院| 99久久人妻综合| 国产免费现黄频在线看| 精品久久久久久久久亚洲| 免费大片18禁| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院 | 老熟女久久久| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 日韩中字成人| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 欧美3d第一页| 亚洲久久久国产精品| 大香蕉久久成人网| 日韩强制内射视频| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4更新| 热re99久久国产66热| 高清毛片免费看| 国产成人精品在线电影| 少妇人妻久久综合中文| videossex国产| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 91精品三级在线观看| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区| 色哟哟·www| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡 | 国产精品蜜桃在线观看| 欧美激情国产日韩精品一区| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 免费大片18禁| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| www.av在线官网国产| 99热国产这里只有精品6| 黄色毛片三级朝国网站| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线 | 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 国产乱来视频区| 亚洲性久久影院| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 午夜福利视频精品| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 在线天堂最新版资源| 亚州av有码| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 免费看不卡的av| 久久99精品国语久久久| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线 | 综合色丁香网| 亚洲av不卡在线观看| 老司机影院毛片| xxx大片免费视频| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 日韩成人伦理影院| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 夫妻午夜视频| 超碰97精品在线观看| 九九在线视频观看精品| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| 天天操日日干夜夜撸| av一本久久久久| 91精品国产九色| 久久久久久久久久人人人人人人| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 黄色一级大片看看| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 五月天丁香电影| 久久久欧美国产精品| 观看av在线不卡| 99九九在线精品视频| 亚洲三级黄色毛片| 中文欧美无线码| av国产久精品久网站免费入址| 丝袜喷水一区| 久久久午夜欧美精品| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 亚洲精品亚洲一区二区| xxxhd国产人妻xxx| av在线app专区| 亚洲激情五月婷婷啪啪| 欧美日韩视频高清一区二区三区二| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看| 久久99一区二区三区| 黄片播放在线免费| 亚洲av在线观看美女高潮| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 搡老乐熟女国产| 免费黄网站久久成人精品| 男女免费视频国产| 中国国产av一级| 亚洲精品乱码久久久v下载方式| 日本黄大片高清| 国产视频首页在线观看| 久久久久久人妻| 免费观看在线日韩| 久久久久人妻精品一区果冻| 高清毛片免费看| 国产成人精品无人区| 一级二级三级毛片免费看| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区蜜桃 | 国产免费现黄频在线看| 国产欧美另类精品又又久久亚洲欧美| 在线观看www视频免费| 国产av精品麻豆| 久久影院123| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 制服丝袜香蕉在线| 91久久精品国产一区二区成人| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕 | 久久这里有精品视频免费| 亚洲熟女精品中文字幕| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 欧美激情 高清一区二区三区| 日本wwww免费看| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 国产成人精品福利久久| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 另类精品久久| 日本免费在线观看一区| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| av在线老鸭窝| 街头女战士在线观看网站| 国产在视频线精品| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 麻豆乱淫一区二区| 久久女婷五月综合色啪小说| a级毛片免费高清观看在线播放| 18禁观看日本| 美女大奶头黄色视频| 免费观看无遮挡的男女| 一区二区日韩欧美中文字幕 | 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 日韩中文字幕视频在线看片| 久久久精品区二区三区| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 制服诱惑二区| a级毛片黄视频| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 亚洲成人手机| 久久毛片免费看一区二区三区| 桃花免费在线播放| 久久久精品区二区三区| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 啦啦啦中文免费视频观看日本| 少妇人妻 视频| 午夜激情av网站| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 亚洲精品久久午夜乱码| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说 | 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 国产精品国产av在线观看| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 日韩视频在线欧美| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 亚洲精品第二区| 日本黄大片高清| 18禁在线无遮挡免费观看视频| 欧美激情 高清一区二区三区| 亚洲精品乱久久久久久| 999精品在线视频| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站| 一区二区三区四区激情视频| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 亚洲国产av影院在线观看| 久久精品夜色国产| 日本免费在线观看一区| 久久青草综合色| 少妇的逼水好多| 一本—道久久a久久精品蜜桃钙片| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| 午夜福利网站1000一区二区三区| 嫩草影院入口| 麻豆成人av视频| 日韩av免费高清视频| 97在线人人人人妻| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区 | 国产永久视频网站| 午夜激情av网站| 日韩av在线免费看完整版不卡| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 建设人人有责人人尽责人人享有的| 国产永久视频网站| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 男女免费视频国产| videossex国产| 国产欧美亚洲国产| 久久ye,这里只有精品| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 日韩精品有码人妻一区| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类| a级毛片在线看网站| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看| 久久久国产精品麻豆| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 国产成人精品婷婷| av黄色大香蕉| 看非洲黑人一级黄片| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 亚洲一区二区三区欧美精品| 一本一本综合久久| 日韩电影二区| 日韩大片免费观看网站| 久久精品国产a三级三级三级| 精品久久久久久久久亚洲| 99热这里只有是精品在线观看| 国产永久视频网站| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 插逼视频在线观看| 美女福利国产在线| 亚洲在久久综合| 18禁在线播放成人免费| 考比视频在线观看| 久久久国产一区二区| 少妇精品久久久久久久| 亚洲国产av影院在线观看| 久久久久久久大尺度免费视频| 日本与韩国留学比较| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| av不卡在线播放| 亚洲人成77777在线视频| 国产免费视频播放在线视频| 久久久久久久久久成人| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 一级片'在线观看视频| 午夜影院在线不卡| 一本—道久久a久久精品蜜桃钙片| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| av在线老鸭窝| 在线观看三级黄色| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 国产国语露脸激情在线看| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区 | 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 男人爽女人下面视频在线观看| 成年美女黄网站色视频大全免费 | 久久久久国产网址| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 国产视频首页在线观看| 国产午夜精品一二区理论片| 一级毛片电影观看| 少妇被粗大的猛进出69影院 | 91久久精品电影网| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 永久免费av网站大全| 亚洲国产色片| 伊人亚洲综合成人网| 国产精品99久久99久久久不卡 | 高清午夜精品一区二区三区| 一本久久精品| 中文字幕人妻丝袜制服| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 日本欧美国产在线视频| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 你懂的网址亚洲精品在线观看| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 成年人午夜在线观看视频| 人成视频在线观看免费观看| 丝袜脚勾引网站| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 91aial.com中文字幕在线观看| 嘟嘟电影网在线观看| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 亚洲内射少妇av| 蜜桃在线观看..| 18禁在线播放成人免费| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱|