Comparison on effects of two different methods of percutaneous transhepatic bile duct puncture lithotomy

Abstract

Objective \nTo compare the effects of U100 laser lithotripsy and pneumatic ballistic lithotripsy in percutaneous transhepatic bile duct exploration. \n \n \nMethods \nA total of 121 patients with intra- and extra-hepatic bile duct stones admitted to the Second Department of General Surgery of our hospital from April, 2017 to March, 2019 were selected and divided into two groups: an experimental group (n=75), treated by ultrasound-guided percutaneous transhepatic bile duct puncture and rigid choledochoscopy for stone removal and by U100 laser lithotripsy; and a control group (n=46), treated by ultrasound-guided percutaneous transhepatic bile duct puncture and rigid choledochoscopy for stone removal and by pneumatic ballistic lithotripsy. The operation time, intraoperative bleeding, residual stone rate, postoperative pain, and liver function on day 1 after the operation were compared between the two groups. \n \n \nResults \nThe average operation time, intraoperative hemobilia, postoperative residual stone rate, and postoperative pain degree were better in the experimental group than in the control group, with statistical differences (all P 0.05). \n \n \nConclusion \nU100 laser lithotripsy has better stone removal efficiency, lower postoperative residual stone rate, and less postoperative pain and liver damage in percutaneous transhepatic bile duct puncture and rigid choledochoscopy, so it is worthy of clinical application. \n \n \nKey words: \nU100;\xa0Pneumatic ballistic lithotripsy;\xa0Bile duct stones;\xa0Rigid choledochoscopy