INDINAVIR UROLITHIASIS: AN EMERGING CAUSE OF RENAL COLIC IN PATIENTS WITH HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS

PURPOSE: We evaluate the clinical, diagnostic and radiographic findings in patients on indinavir therapy who presented with renal colic, and propose appropriate treatment options for indinavir urolithiasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 16 patients positive for human immunodeficiency virus on indinavir were evaluated for 18 episodes of severe renal colic requiring hospitalization. Laboratory evaluation was performed in all patients followed by an imaging study. Conservative treatment included intravenous hydration, narcotic analgesics and temporary cessation of indinavir. Intervention was elected only in patients with persistent fever or intractable pain. A month after hospital discharge an excretory urogram and metabolic stone evaluation were performed. Mean followup was 9.3 months and 2 patients had recurrent symptoms. RESULTS: All patients presented with nausea or vomiting and hematuria. Imaging studies confirmed obstruction in all patients with 13 radiolucent (indinavir) and 3 radiopaque (calcium oxalate) stones. Patients with radiolucent and radiopaque stones demonstrated significant differences in urinary pH (p = 0.002) and serum creatinine (p = 0.03). Conservative therapy was successful in 11 patients (68.8%) within 48 hours and 4 patients (25%) with radiolucent calculi required endoscopic stenting for persistent fever. Metabolic stone evaluation demonstrated significant hypocitruria (less than 50 mg./24 hours) in all patients with radiolucent calculi. CONCLUSIONS: The urologist should be familiar with this growing cause of renal colic in patients on indinavir therapy. Pure indinavir stones are radiolucent and have a soft, gelatinous endoscopic appearance. Conservative treatment is successful in most patients and if intervention is deemed medically necessary, endoscopic stent placement should be the procedure of choice.     

Treatment for human immunodeficiency virus with indinavir may cause relevant urological side-effects, effectively treatable by rehydration.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the occurrence of, and diagnostic and therapeutic procedures for urological side-effects (e.g. micro- and macrohaematuria, and kidney stone formation) in individuals treated with indinavir for the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study comprised a retrospective follow-up of 74 individuals infected with HIV-1 and who were treated with indinavir orally at a daily dose of 2.4 g. Data were collected at the outpatient department of our institution between March 1996 and November 1997. RESULTS: Of the 74 individuals treated with indinavir, 15 (20%) had indinavir-related urological side-effects (19 episodes), most commonly dull flank pain and dysuria. Microhaematuria occurred in 16 of the 19 episodes. Four patients showed urinary tract distension ultrasonographically as a possible indirect sign of urolithiasis and one patient passed a kidney stone. In four patients treatment had to be stopped permanently, but in the remaining 11 patients treatment was continued. Some patients required dose reduction and/or interruption of treatment; only conservative therapeutic measures were required, consisting of rehydration (fluid intake >1.5 L/day) and analgesics. CONCLUSIONS: Urological side-effects of indinavir may be apparent in 20% of patients so treated; some (5%) may require permanent withdrawal. In addition to a history and clinical examination, urine analysis and ultrasonography were the only diagnostic procedures required. Therapy is mainly conservative, using rehydration, analgesics and a brief discontinuation of therapy, according to the severity of the symptoms.     

The etiology of urolithiasis in HIV infected patients

PURPOSE: It is commonly thought that urinary lithiasis in HIV infected patients on protease inhibitor therapy is composed primarily of the protease inhibitor itself. Since many HIV infected patients on protease inhibitors presenting to our institution had nonprotease inhibitor stones, we investigated potential underlying metabolic abnormalities that may account for the lithogenesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all HIV infected patients on protease inhibitors with renal colic and evidence of nephrolithiasis who presented to our institution between June 1996 and January 2001. Patients were evaluated for stone composition and metabolic abnormalities of blood and urine when possible. RESULTS: A total of 24 patients were identified, and all were or had been on protease inhibitors (indinavir 14, ritonavir 3, nelfnavir 2, unspecified 5). Of the 14 patients on indinavir only 4 (28.6%) had indinavir containing stones. The remaining stones in this group and in those not on indinavir contained various amounts of calcium oxalate monohydrate and dihydrate, ammonium acid urate and uric acid. Of 10 patients who underwent 24-hour urine collection for metabolic evaluation 8 (80%) had abnormalities, including hypocitraturia in 5, hyperoxaluria in 4, hypomagnesuria in 4, hypercalciuria in 3, increased supersaturation of calcium oxalate in 3 and hyperuricosuria in 2. Abnormalities in the levels of urinary phosphate and sodium were also observed. CONCLUSIONS: HIV infected patients form many types of stones, which probably are attributable to underlying metabolic abnormalities rather than the use of protease inhibitors. A complete metabolic evaluation is warranted in these patients, as a means of guiding treatment to prevent future stone episodes, while avoiding the need to alter antiretroviral regimens.     

Imaging characteristics of indinavir calculi

PURPOSE: Indinavir sulfate is an effective protease inhibitor of the human immunodeficiency virus type 1. Use is associated with a significant incidence of crystallization and stone formation in the urinary tract, and these calculi are not visible on plain radiographs. Previously all urinary stones, including uric acid and matrix, were believed to be radiodense on computerized tomography (CT). We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the radiographic appearance of indinavir calculi. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective chart review of 36 patients taking indinavir sulfate and presenting with renal colic was performed with attention to presentation, urinalysis, radiographic evaluation and management. Specifically, imaging characteristics on CT were addressed. RESULTS: All patients complained of ipsilateral flank pain and 35 had nausea and/or vomiting. Of 30 patients with dysuria or urgency the majority had hematuria, and most had pyuria and/or proteinuria. No stones were visualized on abdominal radiography. Diagnosis was confirmed on 1 of 13 excretory urograms and 4 of 11 renal ultrasounds. None of 12 CT scans was diagnostic of renal lithiasis. CONCLUSIONS: Indinavir sulfate is a protease inhibitor with poor solubility and significant urinary excretion. Crystallization and stone formation are demonstrated in as many as 20% of patients taking the medication. Most patients present with flank pain, nausea or vomiting and hematuria. Previously CT was thought to identify all urinary calculi with clarity but it cannot reliably confirm the presence of indinavir calculi.     

Low-dose computed tomography for the evaluation of flank pain in the pregnant population

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of the pregnant patient with suspected renal colic is complex. Fetal irradiation concerns have traditionally prohibited the use of CT in this population. We report our institution's experience using low-dose CT in the evaluation of pregnant patients with refractory flank pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent low-dose CT evaluation of the urinary tract for suspected urinary tract stones was performed. Data obtained included gestational age, urinalysis and ultrasonography results, CT findings, and calculated fetal radiation exposure. RESULTS: Between April 2004 and December 2006, 20 patients with an average gestational age of 26.5 weeks presented to our institution with acute, refractory flank pain consistent with a diagnosis of urolithiasis. All patients underwent renal ultrasonographic evaluation before unenhanced CT of the abdomen and pelvis using a low-dose protocol. The average radiation exposure was 705.75 mrads (range 210-1372; SD +/- 338.66 mrads). Of the 20 patients, CT demonstrated urinary stones (1-12 mm) in 13. Of those patients with documented stones, 4 were treated conservatively, 2 underwent intrapartum stent placement, 5 had ureteroscopy with stone extraction, and 2 were treated postpartum. CONCLUSION: Low-dose CT is highly sensitive and specific for the detection of urinary calculi in the pregnant population. CT confers a low risk of fetal harm and can improve patient care when used judiciously.     

Noninvasive anesthesia,analgesia and radiation-free extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for stones in the most distal ureter: experience with 165 patients

PURPOSE: Spontaneous ureteral stone passage often causes severe renal colic, especially when the stone passes through the narrow ureteral orifice. In these situations noninvasive anesthesia-free, analgesia-free and radiation-free extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) (Dornier Medical Systems, Marietta, Georgia) is a valuable tool. It can be performed at any time without needing any further patient preparation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 165 patients underwent ESWL using the Lithostar Ultra device (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany). Only ureteral calculi within 5 cm. of the ureterovesical junction were included in this study. Patients were treated while supine and stones were localized by ultrasound through the filled bladder without x-ray exposure. Treatment was started without anesthesia or analgesia and analgesics were administered only at patient request during treatment. RESULTS: Of the patients 93% were treated without anesthesia or analgesia and 7% required a single intravenous dose of 25 mg. pethidine. Postoperatively renal colic developed in 40 patients (24%). In 4 cases (2.4%) renal drainage was required for analgesia resistant pain or obstructive pyelonephritis. On day 1 after ESWL 90% of the patients were stone-free or had fragments 2 mm. or less, while 10% had residual fragments 3 mm. or greater. Of all patients 7% were re-treated once. At 3 months postoperatively 129 of the 130 evaluable patients (99%) were stone-free. CONCLUSIONS: ESWL of stones located in the most distal ureter using the Lithostar Ultra device is effective, safe and radiation-free. It is done without anesthesia and in most cases without analgesics. This simple and noninvasive procedure is an excellent first line treatment modality for prevesical stones and it represents a valid alternative to conservative management or invasive endoscopy.     

Recurrences during a 10-year follow-up after first renal stone episode

Summary Each of 92 patients in a Swedish district served by only one hospital had been treated for their first renal stone in 1977 and was evaluated 10 years later. Recurrent stone formation during the observation period was observed in 26% of the patients, with no difference between men and women. Of all the patients who had sought medical advice in 1977 because of urinary stone colic, 51% were experiencing their first stone episode. Ten years later 37% of the original patients were still classified as single stone formers. The recorded recurrence rate was lower than that prevously reported in the literature.     

Treatment of painful caliceal stones

Nonmobile caliceal stones cause pain more often than previously appreciated. The character and intensity of the pain differs from typical renal colic. Twenty-six patients with caliceal stones and pain underwent attempted treatment for pain control via stone removal or disintegration: 15 were treated with percutaneous stone extraction (PSE), 10 with extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL), and 1 required open surgery after failing PSE. One patient had persistent pain after ESWL and subsequently underwent PSE; 25 of 26 patients had complete relief of pain. Morbidity was minimal. Patients with painful caliceal stones should be offered ESWL, followed by PSE if pain persists.     

Urolithiasis associated with protease inhibitors.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the radiographic characteristics as well as the clinical management of urolithiasis induced by systemic therapy with indinavir sulfate, a protease inhibitor utilized in the treatment of HIV infection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifteen consecutive HIV-positive male patients (average age 41.3 years) who presented with urolithiasis while being treated with indinavir sulfate (average time 11.1 months) were studied. RESULTS: All patients presented with flank pain, and eight had gross hematuria. All but one patient had microscopic hematuria. The location of the stones was the kidney in three, the proximal ureter in four, and the distal ureter in nine. One patient had both a renal and a proximal ureteral stone. The stones were radiolucent on CT imaging in five patients and could not be seen in five. In the five cases in which a stone was not definitely identified, a diagnosis of urolithiasis was established on the basis of ureteral obstruction and periureteral/renal streaking noted on CT. Treatment included observation with hydration in eight patients, ureteral stent placement in two patients, ureteroscopy in three patients, and extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in two patients. Stones were analyzed in five patients and proved to be 100% indinavir in three and a mixture of indinavir, calcium oxalate monohydrate, and calcium oxalate dihydrate in two. CONCLUSIONS: Urolithiasis is a recognized complication of treatment with indinavir sulfate. Pure indinavir stones cannot be seen on CT unless intravenous contrast medium is utilized. Mixed calcium and indinavir stones can occur and may be radiopaque. The majority of HIV-positive patients with symptomatic urolithiasis can be treated conservatively with hydration. Metabolic evaluation of these patients with identification and correction of factors predisposing to stone formation may minimize future recurrences. Administration of this effective medication thus can continue uninterrupted.     

Urolithiasis and the protease inhibitor indinavir

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate specific urological abnormalities in patients treated with the protease inhibitor indinavir. METHODS: A series of 155 consecutive human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients were treated with indinavir 800 mg p.o. three times a day. Of these, 14 (9%) treated for 1-321 (average 110) days experienced severe flank pain and were subjected to clinical and laboratory examinations. RESULTS: Abdominal X-ray was consistently negative for stones. Ultrasonography showed upper-tract dilatation in 12 patients. Intravenous urography showed obstruction above a radiolucent obstacle in 7 patients; in 2 cases, there was a marked delay in urine excretion on the obstructed side. The mean urine pH was 6. Urine culture was negative. Serum uric acid, phosphorus, and calcium levels were normal. In 8 patients there was slight renal insufficiency, and 4 patients required ureteral stenting. In all cases, hyperhydration and oral analgesia led to a favorable outcome. In 3 patients, chemical analysis of the stone demonstrated monohydrate indinavir crystals. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, indinavir therapy is associated with urolithiasis in 9% of the cases. Hydration, analgesia, and acidification of the urine usually lead to a favorable clinical outcome. Prophylactic hydration and acidification of the urine are extremely important.     

Rapid extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for proximal ureteral calculi in colic versus noncolic patients

OBJECTIVES: In delayed extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) treatment, increasing stone impaction is associated with delayed stone clearance. Whether colic patients treated by rapid ESWL have the same time to stone clearance as noncolic patients, which supports the thesis that stones in both groups are nonimpacted, has not been investigated yet, and was the objective of this study. METHODS: A total of 82 patients were prospectively enrolled and treated with piezoelectric ESWL for a solitary proximal ureteral stone. Of these, 56 patients experienced at least one colic episode compared with 26 noncolic patients. Hydronephrosis has been assessed with the use of ultrasound and intravenous urography (IVU). Time to stone clearance after the first ESWL and stone-free rates after a follow-up period of 3 mo were recorded. RESULTS: In colic and noncolic patients, mean stone size was 7.8mm (p=0.7). Ultrasound-detected hydronephrosis was present in 88% versus 39% (p<0.0001), whereas IVU-detected hydronephrosis was present in 60% versus 7.7% (p=0.0001). Mean number of impulses applied was 8000+/-4000 versus 6700+/-3400 (p=0.1). Mean time to stone clearance was 9.5+/-12.1 d versus 4.6+/-3.8 d (p=0.1). Colic and noncolic patients were considered as treatment success in 83% and 81% after 3 mo of follow-up (p=0.9). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment outcome and time to stone clearance after rapid ESWL in colic patients compared with noncolic patients is comparable and independent of concomitant hydronephrosis. This finding suggests an absence of significant impaction in proximal ureteral stones treated within 24h after a first colic episode, enforcing the concept of performing rapid ESWL in patients harbouring proximal ureteral stones.     

急诊输尿管镜治疗输尿管结石并首次肾绞痛的疗效观察

目的 评价急诊输尿管镜治疗输尿管结石并首次肾绞痛的疗效.方法 本院2010年7月至2011年7月期间收治的140例输尿管结石患者纳入本研究范畴,其中60例输尿管结石患者首次肾绞痛时就诊,急诊行输尿管镜钬激光碎石,纳入第一组；80例患者对症处理后立即入院或肾绞痛再次发作入院并常规检查后再行输尿管镜钬激光碎石,纳入第2组.对两组患者的碎石效果、辅助治疗及相关并发症等指标进行比较,行统计学分析,得出结论.结果 140例患者均经输尿管镜检查,第1组结石大小0.80±0.31 cm,结石一次性清除率96.67％,无患者因结石疼痛再次就诊；第2组结石大小0.75±0.35 cm,结石一次性清除率95.00％,因结石疼痛再次就诊次数2.03±1.85,两组患者无严重并发症发生.结论 急诊输尿管镜治疗输尿管结石并首次肾绞痛安全可行,能及时解除疼痛.     

Emergency extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for obstructing ureteral stones

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate emergency treatment of obstructing ureteral stones by in situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) during acute renal colic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 1994 to February 2000, 200 patients (mean age: 42 years) were treated by ESWL (EDAP LT-02) for obstructing ureteral stones causing acute renal colic refractory to medical treatment or recurring within 24hours of such treatment. Stones were visualised by fluoroscopic imaging and/or ultrasound. Follow-up included radiological and/or ultrasound examinations and lasted three months. RESULTS: Mean stone size was 7mm (3-20mm). At three months, 164/200 (82%) patients were stone-free. This rate ranged from 79% to 83% according to the location of the stone, and from 75% to 86% according to the size of the stone. These differences in rate were not significant. Two or three ESWL sessions were required in 79 patients. ESWL was well tolerated in 90% of patients. The only complication was a case of pyelonephritis requiring the placement of a JJ stent, administration of antibiotics, and distant ureteroscopy. The 36 patients, in whom ESWL failed, underwent ureteroscopy (n=23) or lithotripsy with a Dornier machine (n=13). CONCLUSION: Non-deferred ESWL for acute renal colic secondary to obstructing ureteral stones has a satisfactory success rate and very low morbidity.     

妊娠期顽固性肾绞痛的腔内处理

目的探讨腔内诊治妊娠期肾积水合并顽固性肾绞痛的安全性和有效性。 方法回顾性分析2017年3月至2018年9月我院收治的78例妊娠期肾积水合并顽固性肾绞痛患者的病例资料。根据顽固性肾绞痛持续时间将患者分为A组（6 h以内16例）,B组（6～12 h 53例）和C组（12 h以上9例）。 结果58例术中发现输尿管结石,16例（27.6%）术前彩超未见输尿管结石,行输尿管镜碎石取石和留置输尿管双J管。输尿管结石清除率87.9%（51/58）。20例未发现输尿管结石但合并肾盂结石患者,术中留置输尿管双J管。9例（11.5%）有先兆流产表现,其中A组1例（6.25%）,B组4例（7.55%）,C组4例（44.4%）。C组先兆流产的发生率高于A和B组（P<0.05）。1例（6.25%）患者出现尿源性脓毒血症,抗感染等对症处理后痊愈。所有患者均成功通过围产期并生产健康婴儿。 结论对于妊娠期肾积水合并顽固性肾绞痛的患者,早期输尿管镜腔内处理是有效安全的诊断和治疗手段,可降低孕妇和胎儿的风险。     

Rapid extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy treatment after a first colic episode correlates with accelerated ureteral stone clearance

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relationship between delay in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) after a first colic and subsequent time to complete stone clearance. METHODS: This prospective, non-randomized study included 94 patients treated with ESWL for unilateral solitary proximal ureteral stones after at least one episode of colic pain. Time between the first onset of colic pain and ESWL and stone clearance was recorded. The pretherapeutic degree of hydronephrosis has been assessed using ultrasound. RESULTS: Mean stone size was 7.9 +/- 2.3 mm and mean time before ESWL after a first colic was 93.4 +/- 143.5 h. At 3 months, 3 patients were lost to follow-up. In 76.9% of patients stones were completely cleared and a further 3.3% harbored residual fragments < or =3 mm. Delay in treatment after a first colic correlated with subsequent time to stone clearance (p < 0.0001). Mean time to stone clearance in patients treated within 24h was 6.4 +/- 6.3 days compared with 16.0 +/- 17.8 days for those treated later (p = 0.008). Maximum stone diameter correlated with time to stone clearance (p = 0.031), but the degree of hydronephrosis did not. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid ESWL after a first onset of colic pain resulted in accelerated stone clearance independent of the degree of hydronephrosis but had no impact on the need for auxiliary procedures.     

Is intravenous urography a prerequisite for renal shockwave lithotripsy?

PURPOSE: To determine whether intravenous urography (IVU) is a prerequisite for shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) of renal stones by addressing whether using non-contrast-enhanced CT (NCCT) instead of IVU for delineating urinary tract anatomy is associated with post-SWL complications. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-eight patients treated by SWL (Econolith 2000) for radiopaque renal stones underwent either IVU or NCCT. Twenty patients with normal urinary tracts or with mild hydronephrosis proximal to the stone on urography comprised the IVU group. Eighteen patients who underwent NCCT and plain abdominal (KUB) films and had urinary tract systems similar in appearance to the IVU group comprised the NCCT group. The two groups were of similar mean age (45.75 years, range 24-73 years; and 49.0 years, range 26-72 years, respectively) and had a similar mean stone size (10.1-10.2 mm). Patients with internal ureteral or nephrostomy catheters were excluded. Information on episodes of intractable renal colic, urinary tract infections, and hospitalization was recorded at follow-up 2 to 6 weeks post-SWL. RESULTS: The IVU and NCCT patients had similar mean stone fragmentation rates (80% and 74%, respectively) at 2 to 6 weeks post-SWL. Four IVU patients (20%) had intractable renal colic. One NCCT patient (5.5%) had a urinary infection. Complication and hospitalization rates in the two groups were not significantly different (P = 0.34; Fisher' exact test). CONCLUSIONS: Using only NCCT before SWL was not associated with higher complication rates. Thus, IVU is not a prerequisite for SWL of radiopaque renal stones in patients with a normal urinary tract anatomy as seen on NCCT.     

Ureteroscopy and holmium laser lithotripsy in pregnancy: stents must be used postoperatively

PURPOSE: To present our experience with ureteroscopy and holmium laser lithotripsy in pregnant patients and discuss the need for stents postoperatively. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on seven consecutive pregnant patients presenting with renal colic necessitating intervention between 1997 and 2003. One patient presented during the first, five in the second, and one in the third trimester. Abdominal ultrasonography was the primary diagnostic test. If the stone could not be seen with a rigid ureteroscope, flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS) was performed. Stones were fragmented with a holmium laser, and large fragments were taken out. Ureteral stents were placed routinely in all but the first two patients. RESULTS: The ureteral stones could be seen with ultrasonography in three patients. In four patients, holmium lasertripsy could be done by the rigid ureteroscope. In the remaining patients, f-URS was performed, and two upper-system stones were fragmented. Six patients were rendered stone free. In one patient, both collectingsystem dilation and right perirenal liquid accumulation were present by ultrasonography, but no stones could be detected. Ureteral-stent insertion reduced postoperative pain and analgesic use in the whole group. CONCLUSIONS: When conservative therapy fails in the pregnant patient with a ureteral stone, ureteroscopy and holmium lasertripsy should be considered. Routine insertion of ureteral stents with pull-out strings for at least 72 hours will reduce the pain and analgesic use postoperatively.     

Urothelial cancer of the renal pelvis in percutaneous nephrolithotomy patients

INTRODUCTION: The association between staghorn calculus of the kidney long-standing and urothelial tumors of the renal pelvis is well documented. We describe 3 patients with urothelial cancer in a kidney who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of our series of more than 500 PCNLs revealed 3 patients in whom urothelial cancer of the renal pelvis was diagnosed during or following percutaneous stone removal. Preoperative assessment included IVP, renal sonography and renal scan using DTPA in all 3 patients, and CT in 2 patients. Imaging did not raise the suspicion of a neoplastic lesion. RESULTS: All patients had a long history of urolithiasis and urinary infections. No patient was diagnosed preoperatively. One patient was diagnosed postoperatively, when a CT demonstrated a renal lesion. The second patient underwent simple nephrectomy due to a non-functioning kidney, and the tumor was found on pathological analysis. In the third patient, biopsies were taken from a suspicious-looking tissue in the renal pelvis during the PCNL session. All patients had transitional cell carcinoma: 1 associated with sarcomatoid features and 1 with squamous carcinoma. They all died from metastatic disease 2-19 months after the diagnosis of urothelial cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The preoperative diagnosis of urothelial cancer in patients with staghorn stones is difficult due to the existing stone and inflammation. Since the prognosis of urothelial cancer is extremely poor, biopsies of the renal pelvis, obtained directly through the nephroscope during the PCNL session, may be the only key for early diagnosis and treatment. A high index of suspicion should be raised when patients suffering from infected staghorn calculi are encountered, and such intraoperative biopsies should be considered.     

影响第二次冲击波碎石术治疗上尿路结石患者成功的因素分析

目的 探讨影响第二次冲击波碎石术（extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, ESWL）治疗上尿路结石患者成功的因素。方法 回顾性分析2008年1月至2012年12月来本院接受第二次ESWL治疗的上尿路结石患者120例。根据患者上尿路结石有无完全排出分为成功组（n=80）和失败组（n=40）。回顾性分析所有患者的病历资料,相关因素分析包括性别、年龄、病程、BMI、结石侧别、结石位置、结石长度、结石宽度、结石数目、肾绞痛、血尿、肾积水程度、非增强螺旋CT值、冲击次数、冲击能量等指标。应用单因素、多因素非条件Logistic回归分析上尿路结石患者第二次ESWL治疗成功与否的危险因素分析。结果 120例上尿路结石患者临床特征显示,两组在病程、BMI、结石长度、结石宽度、结石数量、肾绞痛、肾积水程度、CT值、冲击次数方面差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）,在性别、年龄、结石侧别、结石位置、血尿、冲击能量方面差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。经单因素、多因素 Logistic 回归分析结果显示,BMI偏高、结石长度＞2 cm、存在肾绞痛、肾积水程度严重、CT值＞750 HU会增加上尿路结石患者第二次ESWL治疗失败的风险（P＜0.05）。结论 临床医师利用ESWL第二次治疗上尿路结石患者过程中,应格外注意患者BMI、结石长度、肾绞痛、肾积水程度、CT值等关键指标。     

输尿管软镜钬激光碎石术在马蹄肾结石中的应用

目的:探讨输尿管软镜钬激光碎石术治疗马蹄肾结石的安全性及有效性。方法:回顾性分析2005年1月～2010年12月采用输尿管软镜钬激光碎石术治疗马蹄肾结石13例患者资料。结石直径平均为1.7(1.2～2.3)cm。主要临床症状为腰痛、尿路感染、血尿。6例患者有ESWL史,2例曾行经皮肾镜取石术。术前1周均留置双J管,均行尿培养、静脉尿路造影及双肾CT检查。术中均先放置输尿管扩张鞘,然后置入输尿管软镜抵达肾盂。术后第1天及2个月复查KUB平片、B超或双肾CT平扫。术后检查无残石或结石残块<3mm视为碎石成功。结果:13例患者均顺利放置镜鞘并置入输尿管软镜,进镜成功率100%。患者碎石成功12例(92.3%)。1例术后结石残块略大于3mm,行ESWL处理。平均手术时间90min,平均住院2d。无手术并发症发生。术后症状均消失。结论:输尿管软镜钬激光碎石术治疗马蹄肾结石是一种可供选择的安全、有效、微创治疗方法。