| 微创经皮肾输尿管镜碎石术和体外冲击波碎石术治疗上尿路结石的对比研究 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 周亮,李鹏,金晓冬,叶光前,刘伟华. 微创经皮肾输尿管镜碎石术和体外冲击波碎石术治疗上尿路结石的对比研究[J]. 中国现代医生, 2013, 51(5): 40-41,44 |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 周亮 李鹏 金晓冬 叶光前 刘伟华 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 周亮 (宁波市北仑区人民医院泌尿外科,浙江宁波,315800)； 李鹏 (浙江省湖州市中心医院泌尿外科,浙江湖州,313000)；金晓冬 (浙江大学医学院附属第一医院泌尿外科,浙江杭州,310003)； 叶光前 (宁波市北仑区人民医院泌尿外科,浙江宁波,315800)； 刘伟华 (宁波市北仑区人民医院泌尿外科,浙江宁波,315800)； |
| |
| 摘 要： | 目的对比分析微创经皮。肾输尿管镜碎石术和体外冲击波碎石术治疗上尿路结石的临床疗效和安全性，旨在为临床治疗提供指导依据。方法选取2011年1月～2012年1月我院治疗的80例上尿路结石患者，术前均经泌尿系B超、静脉肾盂造影（IVP）等检查确诊，无输尿管狭窄及肾功能异常。将患者随机分为观察组（MPCNI）和对照组（ESWL），各40例。比较两组结石清除率及手术时间、并发症情况。结果观察组结石清除率明显高于对照组，差异有统计学意义（x^2=8．237，P〈0．05）。观察组无论结石大小，其手术时间均明显短于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。观察组并发症例数明显少于对照组（P〈0．05）。结论与体外冲击波碎石术相比．微创经皮肾输尿管镜碎石术具有单次结石清除率高、手术时间点、并发症少等优点，值得临床推广应用。
|
| 关 键 词： | 微创经皮肾输尿管镜碎石术 体外冲击波碎石术 上尿路结石 不同直径 结石清除率 |
The comparative study of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithoto- my lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for upper uri- nary tract stones |
| |
| Affiliation: | ZHOU Liang LI Peng JIN Xiaodong3 YE Guangqiant LlU Weihua1 1.Urology Surgery, Ningbo City Beilun District People＇s Hospital, Ningbo 315800, China;2.Urology Surgery, Huzhou City Central Hospital in Zhejiang Province, Huzhou 313000, China;3.Urology Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University Medical School, Hangzhou 310003, China; |
| |
| Abstract: | Objective To explore and comparative analysis of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy treatment on the clinical efficacy and safety of urinary tract stones, designed to provide guidance for clinical treatment basis. Methods From January 2011 to January 2012 in our hospital, selected 80 patients with upper urinary tract stones in patients before surgery were confirmed by urinary B ultrasound, intravenous pyelogram （IVP） diagnosed ureteral stenosis and renal dysfunction. A total of 80 cases with upper urinary calculi were randomly divided into observation group （MPCNI） and the control group （ESWL）, each of 40 cases. Compared two groups of stone clearance rate, operative time, complications. Results Compared with the control group, the stone clearance rate of the observation group were significantly higher than that in the control group, the difference was statistically significant （;~ = 8.237, P 〈 0.05）. Observation group regardless of the size of stones, the operative time was significantly shorter than the control group, the difference was statistically significant （P 〈0.05）. Complications in the number of cases of the observation group was significantly less than that of the control group （P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion Compared with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy ureteroscopy single stone clearance rate, operative time points, fewer complications, and worthy of clinical application. |
| |
| Keywords: | Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy lithotripsy Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy Upper urinary tract stones Different diameter Stone clearance rate |
| 本文献已被 维普 等数据库收录！ |
|
