第二军医大学学报  2018, Vol. 39 Issue (10): 1138-1142   PDF    
体外冲击波碎石术治疗胆总管结石研究进展
刘雨1,2, 胡良皞2, 李兆申2     
1. 海军军医大学(第二军医大学)基础医学院一大队, 上海 200433;
2. 海军军医大学(第二军医大学)长海医院消化内科, 上海 200433
摘要: 胆总管结石是常见的胆系疾病,可导致梗阻性化脓性胆管炎、急性胰腺炎等,故去除胆总管结石非常重要。目前胆总管结石一线治疗手段是内镜取石。对于内镜取石失败的患者,体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)成为新的选择。ESWL治疗胆总管结石疗效好,文献报道其结石清除率为73%~93%。ESWL疗效与是否放置鼻胆管、冲击波频率、麻醉方式等因素有关,当ESWL与其他内镜技术联合时疗效更佳。尽管ESWL治疗胆总管结石疗效好、技术成熟,但也存在并发症,其常见的并发症包括术后胆绞痛、胰腺炎、胆道梗阻等。本文就近年ESWL治疗胆总管结石的研究现状作一综述。
关键词: 体外冲击波碎石术     胆总管结石     适应证     影响因素     并发症    
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in treatment of choledocholithiasis: research advances
LIU Yu1,2, HU Liang-hao2, LI Zhao-shen2     
1. Student of the First Brigade, College of Basic Medical Sciences, Navy Medical University(Second Military Medical University), Shanghai 200433, China;
2. Department of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital, Navy Medical University(Second Military Medical University), Shanghai 200433, China
Supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (81470883, 81770635), Shanghai Chenguang Project (12CG40), Shanghai Rising Star Program (17QA1405500), Shanghai Outstanding Young Physician Training Program (AB83030002015034), and Top Talent Youth Program of Shanghai (HZW2016FZ67).
Abstract: Choledocholithiasis is a common disease in biliary system and can cause obstructive suppurative cholangitis, acute pancreatitis and other severe complications. Thus it is very important to remove bile duct stones. Currently the first-line treatment for choledocholithiasis is endoscopic lithotomy. For the patients with failed endoscopic lithotomy, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is a new alternative. Therapeutic effect of ESWL on choledocholithiasis is quite good, with the stone clearence rate being 73%-93% according to many studies. The efficacy of ESWL is related to many factors such as placement of nasal bile duct, shock wave frequence, and anesthesia method. ESWL is more effective when combined with other endoscopic techniques. Although ESWL is effective in the treatment of choledocholithiasis and the related application is mature, there are still complications, including postoperative biliary colic, pancreatitis and biliary obstruction. In this study, we reviewed the research advances of ESWL in the treatment of choledocholithiasis in recent years.
Key words: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy     choledocholithiasis     indication     influencing factors     complication    

胆总管结石是常见的胆系疾病,其发病率为10%~20%。胆总管结石分为原发性结石和继发性结石,前者原发于胆总管,多为棕色胆色素结石;后者为从胆囊排进胆总管内的结石,多为胆固醇结石或黑色素结石。胆总管结石可导致梗阻性化脓性胆管炎、急性胰腺炎、胆汁性肝硬化等[1-2],因此去除胆总管结石非常重要。内镜取石是目前胆总管结石一线治疗手段,内镜下乳头括约肌切开结合柱状球囊扩张和网篮取石术清除结石的成功率高达90%以上[3-5]。然而,当存在结石过大、结石嵌顿、胆管狭窄等情况时,内镜取石往往不能成功。对于内镜取石失败的患者,体外冲击波碎石术(extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy,ESWL)成为新的选择[6-7]。本文就近年ESWL治疗胆总管结石的研究现状进行综述。

1 ESWL原理、设备和适应证

ESWL应用电磁脉冲发生器的工作原理,通过X线或超声对结石进行定位,将较高能量和压力的冲击波指向体内结石,使结石在一定时间内受到上千次的冲击波作用而被击碎。冲击波是声波的一种,具有高尖的正向波,当它通过不同密度或声阻抗介质时,释放能量,击碎结石[8-9]。目前已报道用于胆总管结石治疗的碎石机型有液电式Dornier HM-3碎石机(德国,X线定位)、压电晶体EDAP LT02碎石机(法国,超声定位)和电磁式Lithostar碎石机(英国,X线定位)等[4, 8, 10]

行ESWL治疗胆总管结石时需要对结石进行定位,常用的结石定位方法有X线和超声定位。定位方式需根据结石的性质进行选择。阳性结石可直接应用X线定位,阴性结石可直接应用超声定位或造影剂辅助的X线定位[11-12]。胆总管结石多为胆固醇结石或黑色素结石,阴性结石比例高。Tandan和Reddy[11]报道的283例胆总管结石中97.52%为阴性结石。因此,大部分胆总管结石可直接采用超声定位。此外,也可通过X线定位的方法,经内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography,ERCP)放置鼻胆管,再经鼻胆管注入造影剂显示结石位置。X线定位方法烦琐,且对医师和患者均有放射性损伤,而超声定位简单易行,故大部分医疗中心多直接采用超声定位。

ESWL治疗胆总管结石的一般适应证包括结石直径较大(直径>15 mm)、结石嵌顿、胆总管狭窄、解剖因素异常(毕Ⅱ式术后等)、其他内镜治疗无法取出的结石、患者不接受手术治疗的胆总管结石等[4, 13-14]。随着ESWL设备及技术的发展,其适应证也将日益广泛。

2 ESWL治疗方式和疗效

ESWL治疗常用的麻醉方式有静脉麻醉、全身麻醉、硬膜外麻醉等;碎石机参数包括工作电压、冲击波频率、冲击波次数、冲击波能级、碎石时间等,文献报道这些参数可能与其疗效有关[8, 15-16]

ESWL治疗胆总管结石的疗效通过结石清除率评估,结石清除率一般指治疗前后结石的体积差与治疗前结石体积的比值,结石清除效果分为3个等级:完全清除、部分清除和清除失败。结石完全清除定义为:碎石后胆总管残余结石直径<5 mm,并使用了气囊或网篮清理,其结石清除率为100%;部分清除定义为:碎石后残余结石直径>5 mm并清除了50%以上的结石,但仍需要机械碎石清除大的结石,其结石清除率为50%~100%;清除失败定义为:碎石后残余结石直径>5 mm并且结石清除率<50%[16]

ESWL治疗胆总管结石显示了良好的治疗效果,结石完全清除的患者比例为73%~93%[4, 17-20]。1987年完成并于1989年发表的一项关于第1代碎石机(Dornier HM3)治疗胆总管结石的多中心研究,纳入的42例患者共行57次ESWL治疗,每次治疗冲击波次数为600~2 400次,工作电压为12~22 kV,治疗耗时为20~125 min,术后24 h发现59.5%的患者仍存在胆总管残余结石,经过内镜取石、胆道灌洗、外科手术等处理,最终结石清除率为73.8%[21]。Nicholson等[22]对54例内镜下机械碎石取石失败的胆总管结石患者,用第2代碎石机(Siemens Lithostar)治疗,每次治疗冲击波次数为4 000~6 000次,碎石时间均在60 min以上,70%的患者结石完全清除。Ellis等[23]对83例胆总管结石患者应用第3代碎石机(Stroz Modulith SL20)治疗,通过鼻胆管或T管注入造影剂后行X线定位,结石完全清除率为83%。Tandan等[16]应用ESWL治疗283例内镜取石失败的胆总管结石患者,89.8%的患者接受硬膜外麻醉,其余采用全身麻醉;98.6%的患者放置了鼻胆管,随后行ESWL,平均冲击波次数为9 500次,冲击波频率为90/min,将结石粉碎至直径5 mm以下且内镜取石后,84.4%的患者结石完全清除。以上研究均表明,ESWL治疗胆总管结石疗效确切,可成熟地应用于胆总管结石患者的治疗。

Adamek等[24]比较了ESWL与液电碎石术的治疗效果,发现ESWL治疗组结石清除率为78.5%,而液电碎石术治疗组结石清除率为97.0%,且液电碎石术的治疗次数也少于ESWL。Neuhaus等[20]比较了ESWL和体内激光碎石术的疗效,发现ESWL治疗组结石清除率为73%,体内激光碎石术治疗组结石清除率为97%,且ESWL治疗效果也不及体内激光碎石术。Jakobs等[25]比较了荧光引导的激光碎石术和ESWL的治疗效果,发现ESWL组结石完全清除率为52.9%(9/17),荧光引导的激光碎石术组为82.4%(14/17);但ESWL比荧光引导的激光碎石术治疗时间更短,治疗次数更少,治疗费用更低。总之,与液电碎石术、体内激光碎石术、荧光引导的激光碎石术等其他碎石术相比,ESWL在结石清除率方面仍有不足。

ESWL常与其他内镜技术联合使用,在行ERCP前进行1次ESWL治疗可以提高结石清除率,也可缩短ERCP取石的操作时间,提高机械碎石的成功率和胆总管结石清除率[13, 16, 26]。Tao等[13]研究发现,行ERCP前进行2次ESWL治疗时,总结石清除率高于单纯ERCP(96.0% vs 86.0%,P=0.029);并且,行ERCP前进行ESWL治疗缩短了ERCP操作时间[(43±21)min vs(59±28)min,P=0.034],降低了机械碎石术的使用率(20% vs 30%,P=0.025),提高了巨大结石的清除率(80.0% vs 40.0%,P=0.016)。Adamek等[24]发现使用ESWL治疗胆总管结石成功率为78.5%,而ESWL、体内液电碎石术及体内激光碎石术联合治疗胆总管结石时,成功率接近100%,即使年老患者或高风险患者也几乎全部成功。

ESWL治疗胆总管结石疗效好,但也有复发风险。文献报道经过ESWL治疗4年后20%的患者会发生胆总管结石复发,胆囊存在结石、胆总管结石大小和胆总管扩张的直径是影响胆总管结石复发的危险因素[14]

3 ESWL疗效影响因素

ESWL治疗胆总管结石疗效与是否放置鼻胆管、冲击波频率、麻醉方式、肥胖、碎石机机型等多种因素有关。Harz等[27]报道ESWL治疗前可放置鼻胆管引流胆汁,解除梗阻,避免结石嵌顿;另外,通过鼻胆管注入造影剂更容易观察结石,从而冲击波靶向更准确,提高结石清除率,缩短治疗时间,减少患者不适感。Tandan等[16]认为年龄、性别、结石数量和胆总管远端狭窄不影响碎石效果,但硬膜外麻醉使患者安静、无痛,为ESWL提供了良好的治疗环境,也避免了全身麻醉插管;冲击波频率设为90/min时,所需要的冲击波次数最少;阴性结石需要的冲击波次数少于阳性结石。Darisetty等[28]对1 509例胆总管结石和胰管结石患者进行ESWL治疗,其中98%的患者采用胸段硬膜外麻醉,结果发现接受胸段硬膜外麻醉患者的手术时间比接受静脉麻醉者更短。另外,肥胖也与ESWL碎石效果有关,肥胖患者结石清除率较低,需要ESWL治疗的次数更多[29]。研究认为结石大小是影响ESWL碎石效果的主要因素。但Muratori等[14]认为结石性质和大小与ESWL碎石效果无关。Tao等[30]在应用ESWL治疗胆总管结石时经静脉持续给予患者胆囊收缩素(cholecystokinin,CCK),发现在ESWL治疗期间使用CCK后结石清除率提高。体外冲击波碎石机的机型也与ESWL疗效有关。Cecinato等[10]研究发现,应用Siemens Lithostar Plus碎石机和Storz Modulith SLX-F2碎石机分别治疗胆总管结石时,二者的结石清除率无明显差异,但Storz Modulith SLX-F2碎石机的冲击波次数少,并发症的发生率低,且不需阿片类镇痛药辅助镇痛。

综上所述,ESWL治疗胆总管结石疗效受多种因素影响,通过放置鼻胆管、调整冲击波频率等可提高其疗效。

4 ESWL并发症

ESWL常见并发症有术后胆绞痛、胰腺炎、胆道梗阻等[11]。Yasuda[31]报道接受ESWL治疗的胆总管结石患者,15%的患者术后出现高淀粉酶血症。Neuhaus等[20]发现ESWL治疗的30例胆总管结石患者中,2例在碎石期间发生轻度心律失常,1例发生胆道出血,1例出现呼吸衰竭。Ellis等[23]发现ESWL治疗后有患者出现血尿、肾周血肿。Tandan等[16]报道应用ESWL治疗283例胆总管结石患者,12.01%的患者出现胆道出血。目前ESWL治疗出现的并发症尚无有效的预防措施,在冲击波准确靶向、冲击波治疗时保护周围组织等方面还需进一步探索。

5 小结

ESWL治疗内镜取石失败的胆总管结石技术成熟、疗效好,超过90%的患者可以达到结石清除[10]。ESWL疗效与是否放置鼻胆管、冲击波频率、麻醉方式等多种因素有关,ESWL单独应用于胆总管结石时疗效不及液电碎石术或激光碎石术,当ESWL与ERCP等其他内镜技术联合应用时结石清除率较单用ESWL时高。尽管ESWL治疗胆总管结石疗效好,应用成熟,但也存在并发症,如术后胆绞痛、胰腺炎、胆道梗阻等[11],对此类并发症的防治措施有待进一步研究。

参考文献
[1]
WILKINS T, AGABIN E, VARGHESE J, TALUKDER A. Gallbladder dysfunction:cholecystitis, choledocholithiasis, cholangitis, and biliary dyskinesia[J]. Prim Care, 2017, 44: 575-597. DOI:10.1016/j.pop.2017.07.002
[2]
RAMCHANDANI M, PAL P, REDDY D N. Endoscopic management of acute cholangitis as a result of common bile duct stones[J]. Dig Endosc, 2017, 29(Suppl 2): 78-87.
[3]
沈海龙, 狄长安, 田国标. 不同微创治疗方案在胆总管结石患者中的疗效比较[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 2017, 21: 124-125.
[4]
OGURA T, HIGUCHI K. A review of treatment options for bile duct stones[J]. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2016, 10: 1271-1278. DOI:10.1080/17474124.2016.1212658
[5]
OMAR M A, ABDELSHAFY M, AHMED M Y, REZK A G, TAHA A M, HUSSEIN H M. Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation versus endoscopic sphincterotomy for retrieval of large choledocholithiasis:a prospective randomized trial[J]. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A, 2017, 27: 704-709. DOI:10.1089/lap.2016.0601
[6]
CHAUSSY C, BRENDEL W, SCHMIEDT E. Extracorporeally induced destruction of kidney stones by shock waves[J]. Lancet, 1980, 2: 1265-1268.
[7]
SAUERBRUCH T, DELIUS M, PAUMGARTNER G, HOLL J, WESS O, WEBER W, et al. Fragmentation of gallstones by extracorporeal shock waves[J]. N Engl J Med, 1986, 314: 818-822. DOI:10.1056/NEJM198603273141304
[8]
NEISIUS A, WOLLNER J, THOMAS C, ROOS F C, BRENNER W, HAMPEL C, et al. Treatment efficacy and outcomes using a third generation shockwave lithotripter[J]. BJU Int, 2013, 112: 972-981. DOI:10.1111/bju.2013.112.issue-7
[9]
AL-HAKARY S K, HAJI S M, NOORY E A, ISSAQ S Z. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy treatment for renal and ureteral stones in Duhok City[J]. J Mod Phys, 2016, 7: 175-184. DOI:10.4236/jmp.2016.71019
[10]
CECINATO P, FUCCIO L, AZZAROLI F, LISOTTI A, CORREALE L, HASSAN C, et al. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for difficult common bile duct stones:a comparison between 2 different lithotripters in a large cohort of patients[J]. Gastrointest Endosc, 2015, 81: 402-409. DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2014.04.059
[11]
TANDAN M, REDDY D N. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for pancreatic and large common bile duct stones[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2011, 17: 4365-4371. DOI:10.3748/wjg.v17.i39.4365
[12]
PU Y R, MANOUSAKAS I, LIANG S M, CHANG C C. Design of the dual stone locating system on an extracorporeal shock wave lithotriptor[J]. Sensors (Basel), 2013, 13: 1319-1328. DOI:10.3390/s130101319
[13]
TAO T, ZHANG M, ZHANG Q J, LI L, LI T, ZHU X, et al. Outcome of a session of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy before endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for problematic and large common bile duct stones[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2017, 23: 4950-4957. DOI:10.3748/wjg.v23.i27.4950
[14]
MURATORI R, MANDOLESI D, PIERANTONI C, FESTI D, COLECCHIA A, MAZZELLA G, et al. Ductal stones recurrence after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for difficult common bile duct stones:predictive factors[J]. Dig Liver Dis, 2017, 49: 1128-1132. DOI:10.1016/j.dld.2017.05.010
[15]
MURATORI R, AZZAROLI F, BUONFIGLIOLI F, ALESSANDRELLI F, CECINATO P, MAZZELLA G, et al. ESWL for difficult bile duct stones:a 15-year single centre experience[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2010, 16: 4159-4163. DOI:10.3748/wjg.v16.i33.4159
[16]
TANDAN M, REDDY D N, SANTOSH D, REDDY V, KOPPUJU V, LAKHTAKIA S, et al. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of large difficult common bile duct stones:efficacy and analysis of factors that favor stone fragmentation[J]. J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2009, 24: 1370-1374. DOI:10.1111/jgh.2009.24.issue-8
[17]
DARZI A, MONSON J R, KEELING P W, O'MORAIN C, TANNER W A, KEANE F B. Combined ultrasound-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy and MTBE instillation in the treatment of common bile duct stones[J]. Hepatogastroenterology, 1991, 38: 36-38.
[18]
WEBER J, ADAMEK H E, RIEMANN J F. Extracorporeal piezoelectric lithotripsy for retained bile duct stones[J]. Endoscopy, 1992, 24: 239-243. DOI:10.1055/s-2007-1010474
[19]
ADAMEK H E, MAIER M, JAKOBS R, WESSBECHER F R, NEUHAUSER T, RIEMANN J F. Management of retained bile duct stones:a prospective open trial comparing extracorporeal and intracorporeal lithotripsy[J]. Gastrointest Endosc, 1996, 44: 40-47. DOI:10.1016/S0016-5107(96)70227-4
[20]
NEUHAUS H, ZILLINGER C, BORN P, OTT R, ALLESCHER H, RÖSCH T, et al. Randomized study of intracorporeal laser lithotripsy versus extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy for difficult bile duct stones[J]. Gastrointest Endosc, 1998, 47: 327-334. DOI:10.1016/S0016-5107(98)70214-7
[21]
BLAND K I, JONES R S, MAHER J W, COTTON P B, PENNELL T C, AMERSON J R, et al. Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy of bile duct calculi. An interim report of the Dornier U.S. Bile Duct Lithotripsy Prospective Study[J]. Ann Surg, 1989, 209: 743-755. DOI:10.1097/00000658-198906000-00012
[22]
NICHOLSON D A, MARTIN D F, TWEEDLE D E, RAO P N. Management of common bile duct stones using a second-generation extracorporeal shockwave lithotriptor[J]. Br J Surg, 1992, 79: 811-814. DOI:10.1002/(ISSN)1365-2168
[23]
ELLIS R D, JENKINS A P, THOMPSON R P, EDE R J. Clearance of refractory bile duct stones with extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy[J]. Gut, 2000, 47: 728-731. DOI:10.1136/gut.47.5.728
[24]
ADAMEK H E, ROCHLITZ C, VON BUBNOFF A C, SCHILLING D, RIEMANN J F. Predictions and associations of cholecystectomy in patients with cholecystolithiasis treated with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy[J]. Dig Dis Sci, 2004, 49(11/12): 1938-1942.
[25]
JAKOBS R, ADAMEK H E, MAIER M, KROMER M, BENZ C, MARTIN W R, et al. Fluoroscopically guided laser lithotripsy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for retained bile duct stones:a prospective randomised study[J]. Gut, 1997, 40: 678-682. DOI:10.1136/gut.40.5.678
[26]
SEVEN G, SCHREINER M A, ROSS A S, LIN O S, GLUCK M, GAN S I, et al. Long-term outcomes associated with pancreatic extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for chronic calcific pancreatitis[J]. Gastrointest Endosc, 2012, 75: 997-1004. DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2012.01.014
[27]
HARZ C, HENKEL T O, KÖHRMANN K U, PIMENTEL F, ALKEN P, MANEGOLD B C. Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy and endoscopy:combined therapy for problematic bile duct stones[J]. Surg Endosc, 1991, 5: 196-199. DOI:10.1007/BF02653263
[28]
DARISETTY S, TANDAN M, REDDY D N, KOTLA R, GUPTA R, RAMCHANDANI M, et al. Epidural anesthesia is effective for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of pancreatic and biliary calculi[J]. World J Gastrointest Surg, 2010, 2: 165-168.
[29]
LENZE F, HEINZOW H S, HERRMANN E, BERSSENBRÜGGE C, ROTHENBÄCHER H, ULLERICH H, et al. Clearance of refractory bile duct stones with extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy:higher failure rate in obese patients[J]. Scand J Gastroenterol, 2013, 49: 209-214.
[30]
TAO T, ZHANG Q J, ZHANG M, ZHU X, SUN S X, LI Y Q. Using cholecystokinin to facilitate endoscopic clearance of large common bile duct stones[J]. World J Gastroenterol, 2014, 20: 10121-10127. DOI:10.3748/wjg.v20.i29.10121
[31]
YASUDA I. Management of the bile duct stone:current situation in Japan[J]. Dig Endosc, 2010, 22(Suppl 1): S76-S78.