1. <div id="8sgz1"><ol id="8sgz1"></ol></div>

        <em id="8sgz1"><label id="8sgz1"></label></em>
      2. <em id="8sgz1"><label id="8sgz1"></label></em>
        <em id="8sgz1"></em>
        <div id="8sgz1"><ol id="8sgz1"><mark id="8sgz1"></mark></ol></div>

        <button id="8sgz1"></button>
        west china medical publishers
        Keyword
        • Title
        • Author
        • Keyword
        • Abstract
        Advance search
        Advance search

        Search

        find Keyword "Common bile duct stones" 1 results
        • Comparison on Two Minimally Invasive Procedures for Gallstones Combined with Common Bile Duct Stones: A Systematic Review

          Objective To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of ERCP/S+LC and LC+LCBDE in cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Methods A fully recursive literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMbase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in any language. By using a defined search strategy, both the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials on comparing ERCP/ S+LC with LC+LCBDE in cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis were identified. Data were extracted and evaluated by two reviewers independently. The quality of the included trials was evaluated. Meta-analyses were conducted using the Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 5.0.2 software. Results Fourteen controlled clinical trials (1 544 patients) were included. The results of meta-analyses showed that: a) There were no significant difference in the stone clearance rate between the two groups (RR=0.96, 95%CI 0.92 to 1.01, P=0.14); b) There were no significant difference in the residual stone rate between the two groups (OR=1.05, 95%CI 0.65 to 1.72, P=0.83); c) There were no significant difference in the complications morbidity between the two groups (OR=1.12, 95%CI 0.85 to 1.55, P=0.48); d) There were no significant difference in the mortality during follow-up visit between the two groups (RD= 0.00, 95%CI –0.03 to 0.03, P=0.84); e) The length of hospital stay in the LC+LCBDE group was shorter than that of the ERCP/S+LC group with significant difference (WMD= 1.78, 95%CI 0.94 to 2.62, Plt;0.000 1); and f) The LC+LCBDE group was superior to the ERCP/S+LC group in the aspects of procedure time and total hospital charges. Conclusion Although there aren’t differences in the effectiveness and safety between the ERCP/S+LC group and the LC+LCBDE group, the latter is superior to the former in procedure time, length of hospital stay and total hospital charges. For the influencing factors of lower quality and astable statistical outcomes of the included studies, this conclusion has to be verified with more strictly designed large scale RCTs.

          Release date:2016-09-07 11:00 Export PDF Favorites Scan
        1 pages Previous 1 Next

        Format

        Content

          1. <div id="8sgz1"><ol id="8sgz1"></ol></div>

            <em id="8sgz1"><label id="8sgz1"></label></em>
          2. <em id="8sgz1"><label id="8sgz1"></label></em>
            <em id="8sgz1"></em>
            <div id="8sgz1"><ol id="8sgz1"><mark id="8sgz1"></mark></ol></div>

            <button id="8sgz1"></button>
            欧美人与性动交α欧美精品