输尿管下段结石气压弹道碎石与体外冲击波碎石术的比较

目的 :比较输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术 (PL)与体外冲击波碎石术 (ESWL)治疗输尿管下段结石的疗效。方法 :对经PL(PL组 )和ESWL(ESWL组 )治疗的输尿管下段结石患者的临床资料进行比较。结果 :PL组单次碎石成功率为 96 .2 % ,ESWL组为 6 0 .5 % (P <0 .0 5 ) ;PL组术后 4周结石排净率为 98.3% ,ESWL组为6 6 .3%。两组比较 ,差异有统计学意义 (P <0 .0 5 )。结论 :输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管下段结石的疗效明显优于ESWL。     

体外冲击波碎石术与输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管下段结石的疗效比较

目的　比较体外冲击波碎石术 (ESWL)与输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术 (pneumaticlithotripsy ,PL)治疗输尿管下段结石的疗效和安全性。 方法　总结ESWL和PL治疗输尿管下段结石 3 75例的临床资料 ,其中ESWL组 190例 ,PL组 185例。结果　ESWL组单次碎石成功率为 60 .5 %(115 /190 ) ,PL组为 96.2 %(178/185 ) ;ESWL组术后 4周结石排净率为 66.3 %(12 6/190 ) ,PL组为 98.3 %(175 /178)。结论　PL治疗输尿管下段结石的疗效明显优于ESWL。     

输尿管结石体外冲击波碎石失败后腔内钬激光碎石96例分析

目的探讨腔内钬激光碎石治疗体外冲击波碎石（ESWL）失败后的输尿管结石的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析96例ESWL治疗失败后行腔内钬激光碎石的临床资料。其中76例合并息肉或被肉芽组织包裹，6例合并远端输尿管狭窄。结果一次性碎石成功89例，成功率92．7％（89／96），碎石块均在2周内排出。其中8例因术中碎石移位至肾脏，术后2周经ESWL后排出；其余7例因结石远端输尿管狭窄，镜体无法通过，改行开放手术治愈。站论腔内钬激光碎石具有创伤小、并发症少的优点，是治疗ESWL失败后输尿管结石的首选方法。     

孤立肾并复杂性结石的治疗选择

目的探讨孤立肾并复杂性结石的处理方式,提高其治疗的有效性和安全性。方法总结42例孤立肾并复杂性结石的治疗经验。其中先天性4例(10％)、后天原因38例(90％);左侧16例(38％)、右侧26例(62％)。均为铸形或鹿角状、多发性结石,8例合并输尿管结石,6例因急性梗阻性无尿入院;铸形或鹿角状结石首选体外震波碎石(ESWL)后经皮肾镜取石(PCNL)治疗,多发性结石先行PCNL后ESWL处理,部分病例配合腔内碎石。结果36例(86％)经ESWL及PCNL联合治疗获愈,11例PCNL术中辅以腔内碎石,6例梗阻性无尿者急诊ESWL或腔内碎石后12h内恢复排尿;6例(14％)因肾盂输尿管畸形、梗阻改行开放手术,2例继发反复感染需长期肾造瘘。37例获随访6～18个月,32例(86％)肾功能良好、5例(14％)存在肾功能不全,4例(11％)结石复发。结论联合应用ESWL及PCNL可安全有效地清除多数孤立肾的复杂性结石;肾性梗阻性无尿者行急诊ESWL是必要的,对输尿管下段梗阻性结石可首选腔内碎石;伴肾盂明显畸形或输尿管连接部严重狭窄者以选择开放手术为宜。     

ESWL与腔内技术联合处理复杂性上尿路结石(附编者按)

目的　探讨复杂性上尿路结石的治疗方法。　方法　对近期 138例复杂性上尿路结石患者 ,采用体外冲击波碎石 (ESWL)与输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石 ,经皮肾微穿刺造瘘碎石、取石等腔内技术联合治疗。其中复杂性输尿管结石 110例 ,复杂性肾结石 2 8例 ,均有不同程度肾积水。对输尿管结石先行ESWL ,2 4h内再行输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石 ;对肾结石及输尿管镜碎石困难的输尿管上段结石 ,先一期行经皮肾微穿刺造瘘术 ,5～ 7d后行ESWL ,2 4h内再经肾造瘘通道行输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石、取石。　结果　结石总排净率为 97.1% (134/138) ,其中输尿管结石排净率为10 0 .0 % (110 /110 ) ,肾结石排净率为 85 .7% (2 4 /2 8)。无治疗失败病例。　结论　ESWL与腔内技术联合处理复杂性上尿路结石 ,降低了腔内手术难度 ,缩短了腔内操作时间 ,提高了结石排净率 ,患者创伤小 ,恢复快 ,并发症少 ,是治疗复杂性上尿路结石较理想的方法。     

体外震波碎石治疗泌尿系结石7200例分析

目的 :报告ESWL治疗各类泌尿系结石的治疗经验 ,探讨ESWL治疗过程中的相关问题及治疗效果和观点。方法 :对有随访条件的 72 0 0例各类泌尿系结石的治疗和治疗结果 ,其中肾结石 3 192例 ,输尿管结石 3 2 98例 ,膀胱结石468例 ,后尿道结石 2 42例。结果 :3 192例肾结石累计三次排空 3 0 16例 (94.5 % ) ,1962例输尿管上段结石累计三次排空192 2例 (98% ) ,13 3 6例输尿管上段结石累计三次排空 13 0 0例 (97.4% ) ,468例膀胱结石累计三次排空 466例 (99.6% ) ,2 42例后尿道结石累计三次排空 2 42例 (10 0 % )。结论 :ESWL是当前治疗各类泌尿系结石的首选方法 ,其中碎石过程中碎石间隔时间不应少于 10～ 15天。输尿管内大结石碎石时 ,应靠近尿液的一侧逐次碎石 ,愈靠近肾盂口处的结石愈易排石。总之 ,各类泌尿系结石碎石后附以相应的药物消炎、排石、解痉、止血治疗 ,97%的患者能取得满意疗效。     

输尿管结石ESWL失败后腔内手术治疗的选择

目的:探讨输尿管结石体外冲击波碎石(ESWL)失败后行腔内手术治疗的选择。方法:回顾分析153例输尿管结石ESWL失败后接受腔内手术治疗的患者,其中微创经皮肾镜碎石术(MPCNL)20例,输尿管镜碎石术(URL)133例。结果:20例MPCNL患者碎石成功率100%(20/20);133例URL患者碎石成功率81.2%(108/133),3例中转开放手术取石,22例结石上移或残留而再次行ESWL。结论:对于ESWL失败的输尿管结石,选择腔内手术是安全而有效的治疗手段,适应症的掌握、手术方式及时机的选择是治疗成功的关键。     

钬激光碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效比较

目的　比较输尿管镜钬激光碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术 (ESWL)治疗输尿管结石的有效性和安全性。　方法　采用输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石 15 9例 16 8侧 ,其中结石直径≥ 1cm者 76侧 ,<1cm者 92侧。ESWL治疗输尿管结石 319例 334侧 ,其中结石直径≥ 1cm者 14 3侧 ,<1cm者 191侧。比较两组手术时间 结石排净率 手术并发症发生率指标的差异。　结果　对直径≥ 1cm和 <1cm的输尿管结石钬激光碎石术治疗平均手术时间分别为 5 8min和 4 3min ,短于ESWL的平均手术时间 6 8min和 5 6min(P <0 .0 1) ;钬激光碎石术对直径≥ 1cm的输尿管结石 3个月结石排净率为 92 % ,高于ESWL的 6 1% (P <0 .0 1) ;对直径 <1cm的输尿管结石钬激光碎石术和ESWL的 3个月结石排净率分别为 95 %和 85 % (P >0 .0 5 )。钬激光碎石术组并发症发生率为 4 .8%( 8/ 16 8) ,ESWL组无明显并发症发生。　结论　输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗直径≥ 1cm的输尿管结石疗效明显优于ESWL ,而直径 <1cm的结石二者疗效差异无显著性 ,ESWL为直径 <1cm结石的首选治疗方法     

输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石155例

目的 探讨输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石的操作方法和临床疗效。方法 自1997年12月～2003年5月，采用输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石155例。结果 一次性结石粉碎率80％(124／155)，3个月结石排净率为96％；术中发生输尿管穿孔3例，发生率为1．9％(3／155)，未发现术中及术后严重并发症。结论 输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石，成功率高，安全可靠，属腔内微创手术，损伤小，可作为治疗男性输尿管中下段结石和女性全程输尿管结石的首选方法。与ESWL配合应用，互为补充，可大大提高碎石效果。     

输尿管镜钬激光碎石术与气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石效果分析

目的分析输尿管镜钬激光碎石术(HLL)与气压弹道碎石术(PL)治疗输尿管结石的效果。方法随机将118例输尿管结石患者分为2组,各59例。对照组行PL,观察组行输尿管镜HLL。结果观察组手术时间、VAS疼痛评分、住院时间、结石排净率,以及肾功能不全患者的BUN、Scr水平等指标均优于对照组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。2组并发症发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论与PL比较,HLL治疗输尿管结石具有手术时间短、患者疼痛轻、结石排净率高、住院时间短等优势,而且更利于改善患者的肾功能。     

输尿管结石气压弹道碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术疗效比较

目的：比较输尿管结石气压弹道碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术的疗效。方法：回顾分析130例气压弹碎石术与1600例体外冲击波碎石术的的碎石率、结石排净率、平均结石排净时间及并发症发生率。结果：气压弹道碎石术碎石率、结石排净率均大于体外冲击波碎石术，平均结石排出时间小于体外冲击波碎石术，并发症发生率两组问无明显差异。结论：输尿管结石行气压弹道碎石术优于体外冲击波碎石术。     

输尿管结石ESWL失败改腔内钬激光碎石术的疗效观察

目的 探讨输尿管结石ESWL失败后采用腔内钬激光碎石术的临床疗效。方法 自2001年10月至2002年8月，对28例输尿管结石(ESWL失败)行输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术。结果 26例经输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治愈，治愈率92．8％(26／28)；1例结石上移，辅以ESWL治愈；1例因输尿管纤维性扭曲改开放手术。结论 输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术安全、有效、方便，可以作为输尿管结石的首选治疗。     

Pneumatic lithotripsy versus laser lithotripsy in the endoscopic treatment of ureteral calculi

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy, safety, and features of pneumatic lithotripsy (PL) with those of laser lithotripsy (LL) and present our clinical experience in the endoscopic management of ureteral calculi. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From August 1994 to February 2000, 285 consecutive patients underwent endoscopic lithotripsy with either the Swiss Lithoclast pneumatic lithotripter (145 patients) or the Ho:YAG laser lithotripter (140 patients) for the treatment of ureteral calculi. RESULTS: In one single session, the overall successful stone fragmentation rate of LL was higher than that of PL (95.7% v 69.7%; P < 0.01). The average time to stone-free status was shorter for LL than for PL (18 days v 31 days; P < 0.01). No major complications were observed in LL, while five ureteral perforations were encountered in PL. CONCLUSIONS: Laser lithotripsy has advantages over PL in high efficiency of stone fragmentation and a low complication rate. Laser lithotripsy is a powerful, effective, and safe treatment modality for ureteral calculi.     

输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术与ESWL治疗输尿管结石的疗效比较

目的:比较输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术(URSL)与ESWL治疗输尿管结石的疗效及副作用。方法:分别使用URSL与ESWL治疗输尿管结石患者各200例,治疗后应用腹部平片或B超评估其疗效,随访3个月,了解结石清除率,观察并记录治疗后并发症。结果:URSL有效率为91.5%,明显高于ESWL治疗者的总有效率73.5%(P<0.01);其中上段结石有效率87.72%,低于ESWL的93.33%(P<0.05),中下段结石有效率93%,明显高于ESWL的65%(P<0.01);其肾绞痛、恶心、呕吐、发热低于后者(P<0.05)。接受URSL的患者1.5%有输尿管穿孔。结论:URSL治疗输尿管结石的疗效优于ESWL;URSL较适合于输尿管中、下段结石的治疗,而ESWL较适合于输尿管上段结石的治疗。     

输尿管结石三种治疗方法的疗效比较

目的:探讨对输尿管结石治疗方法如何进行选择.方法:对经ESWL、输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术(URSL)及输尿管切开取石术3种方法、治疗的360例输尿管结石患者的疗效进行比较.结果:ESWL174例,碎石率为90.3%,URSL150例,一次碎石率为92.2%,手术切开输尿管取石36例,取石成功率100%.输尿管镜失败改切开取石12例(8%);ESWL失败改切开取石或输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石56例(32.2%).结论:URSL治疗输尿管结石可以避免开放手术对患者造成的痛苦,减少术后并发症,但也不能盲目采用;对于复杂性输尿管结石,开放手术仍是可供选择的重要的治疗手段.     

Primary in situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the management of ureteric calculi: results with a third-generation lithotripter.

OBJECTIVE: To review the results of primary in situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for the treatment of ureteric stones using a third-generation lithotripter, the Dornier MFL 5000 (Dornier Medizentechnic, Germany). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study comprised a retrospective review of treatment outcome in 180 patients with 196 stones who were treated with primary in situ ESWL, assessing the success of this approach and establishing reasons for failure. RESULTS: At the 3-month follow-up, 88% of patients were stone-free; 21 patients failed ESWL and were treated by ureteroscopic stone extraction with no complications. Stone-free rates were 90% for upper ureteric, 89% for middle-third and 86% for lower-third calculi. Twenty-one patients required auxiliary procedures in the form of JJ stenting or nephrostomy. Failure of ESWL was associated with stone size (>1.3 cm) but not location or inadequate treatment. CONCLUSION: Where prompt access to ESWL is available, primary in situ ESWL remains an effective form of treatment for all ureteric calculi, although stone-free rates are lower for larger stones.     

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of renal calculi during early pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of renal stone treatment by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) during pregnancy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from 824 women of reproductive age who were treated by ESWL were analysed and the patients surveyed using a questionnaire about pregnancies, to which 636 (76%) responded. Of these patients, six had inadvertently undergone ESWL for renal stones during the first month of pregnancy. The stones were detected and located during ESWL using ultrasonography. RESULTS: The six patients gave birth to six children who had no detectable malformations or chromosomal anomalies. CONCLUSION: Although these results suggest that there were no adverse effects of ESWL during early pregnancy, a larger series should be assessed to confirm the safety and long-term effects of ultrasound-guided ESWL in the treatment of renal calculi during pregnancy. We do not advocate lithotripsy as a treatment for renal calculi in pregnancy, but inadvertent lithotripsy in a pregnant woman is not a cause for concern.