URSL联合ESWL治疗上段输尿管结石及肾结石

目的探讨提高对输尿管上段及肾结石治疗效果的措施。方法对220例输尿管上段及肾结石患者施行气压弹道碎石术(URSL)联合ESWL进行治疗。结果193例联合治疗一次成功(87.7%);14例碎石不完全,拔除双J管后结石嵌顿于输尿管形成石街,再次URSL治疗成功;10例因肾内结石较大,URSL置入双J管后给予多次ESWL治疗;3例行多次ESWL后摄片结石形态改变不大,改行B超引导下经皮肾穿联合输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石治愈。术后双J管1个月内拔除,结石均于拔管后3月内排净。术后3月复查B超,肾积水显著减轻或消失。结论联合应用URSL与ESWL治疗输尿管上段结石或肾结石,能大大提高碎石效率及结石排净率。     

体外冲击波碎石术后输尿管石街74例临床分析

体外冲击波碎石术（extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy，ESWL）能及时解除结石引起的肾绞痛，减少肾功能损害，具有创伤小、恢复快、费用低、疗效可靠等优点，是目前治疗上尿路结石的首选方法。输尿管石街是ESWL治疗复杂上尿路结石常见的并发症，严重者可引起输尿管梗阻、肾功能受损。现总结分析青州市人民医院2001年10月～2007年10月1800例肾结石、输尿管结石患者行ESWL后发生的74例（4．1％）输尿管石街患者资料，旨在探讨ESWL术后输尿管石街的防治措施。     

低能级体外冲击波碎石治疗肾鹿角形结石

目的探讨低能级体外冲击波碎石(extracorporeal shock wave lithortripsy,ESWL)治疗肾鹿角形结石的效果. 方法对18例鹿角形结石进行体外冲击波治疗.碎石能级1～3级,冲击次数1 800～3 000次,脉冲间隔60 ～80次/min,工作电压10～12.75 kV. 若结石直径>3 cm,在碎石前预先插入双J管,防止石街形成.对直径>4 mm的残余结石,再次行ESWL,直至结石完全消失. 结果所有病人耐受良好,治疗结束能自行回家.除1例碎石失败外,余17例经ESWL治疗成功.治疗3～9次,至完全排除结石.66例次(66/77,85.7%)术后有1～2次肉眼血尿.5例出现石街,长1.9～5.2 cm,4例石街经再次碎石成功,1例输尿管镜取石. 结论低能级ESWL治疗肾鹿角形结石是一种安全、有效的方法.     

钬激光治疗ESWL术后输尿管石街

目的评价钬激光治疗体外冲击碎石（ESWL）术后输尿管石街的疗效。方法对ESWL术后输尿管石街形成的24例患者行钬激光碎石治疗。结果22例碎石成功，1个月后复查输尿管石街排出（成功率91．7％），1例上段输尿管石街中部分结石移位至肾盂再次ESWL治疗，1例因输尿管上段扭曲不能碎石而改行开放手术。结论钬激光治疗ESWL术后输尿管石街成功率高、碎石时间短、安全可靠、操作简单，对输尿管壁无损伤，值得临床推广应用。     

ESWL治疗上尿路结石480例临床分析

目的探讨上尿路结石体外冲击波(ESWL)的治疗效果。方法回顾性分析480例肾及输尿管结石患者行ESWL治疗的效果。结果 ESWL治疗1～3次结石粉碎并排净者473例,治愈率(98.5%)。7例(1.5%)ESWL治疗无效改行输尿管镜或外科手术治疗。结论体外冲击波碎石对于治疗肾及输尿管结石效果满意。     

泌尿外科

肾脏、输尿管：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；微创经皮肾镜取石术治疗小儿复杂性肾结石；钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石；微创经皮肾镜取石术治疗鹿角状结石；采用微创经皮肾穿刺输尿管镜碎石取石术治疗复杂性上尿路结石……     

输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石

目的：探讨输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效。方法：采用输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石患者128例，其中5例为ESWL后输尿管石街形成，6例并发急性梗阻性肾功能不全。结果：128例中，一次性碎石成功117例，占91．4％。碎石失败11例，占8．6％，其中6例输尿管上段结石移位至肾盂，留置双J管后行ESWL治愈，另外2例输尿管穿孔和3例进镜失败患者均立即改行开放手术治愈。6例并发急性梗阻性肾功能不全患者碎石术后即进入多尿期，2周后复查肾功能恢复正常。结论：输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石具有微创、安全、效果好等优点，可作为输尿管中、下段结石的首选治疗方法。     

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。     

腔内弹道碎石加ESWL联合治疗复杂上尿路结石的临床观察

目的：探讨输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石,体外冲击波碎石（ESWL）及经皮肾穿刺取石联合治疗复杂性上尿路结石的疗效。方法：自1998年8月－2000年12月分别采用输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石,ESWL及经皮肾穿刺取石联合治疗复杂性上尿路结石133例。结果：结石总排净率为90．2％（120／133）,其中肾铸形结石排净率为87．9％（29／33）,输尿管结石排净率为91．0％（91／100）,并发症主要为输尿管穿孔及顽固血尿,占3．7％,结论：采用此联合方法治疗复杂性上尿路结石的排净率高,损伤小,可有效地避免开放手术之痛苦。     

输尿管软镜钬激光碎石术治疗鹿角形肾结石疗效分析

目的 探讨输尿管软镜钬激光碎石术治疗鹿角形肾结石的效果。方法 对18例鹿角形结石患者,实施全麻下输尿管软镜钬激光碎石术。术后1周复查KUB平片,了解碎石效果及双J管位置。术后4周再次复查KUB平片,评估结石清除率。无碎块残留或残块3 mm,视为碎石成功,可拔除双J管。残留结石3 mm为有意义的结石残留,需再次行输尿管软镜钬激光碎石术治疗。结果 患者均一次性放置镜鞘并置入输尿管软镜。手术时间60~250 min,术后住院时间5~8 d,单次手术结石清除率为77.8%(14/18),二次手术结石清除率为94.4%(17/18)。1例患者术后“石街”形成,3周后复查KUB结石排出。术中未发生大出血、输尿管穿孔、输尿管撕脱、术后尿源性脓毒血症等严重并发症。结论 输尿管软镜钬激光碎石术治疗鹿角形肾结石,微创、安全、有效。     

Utility of ureteral stent for stone street after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

We reviewed the records of the 530 patients with urinary stones (renal stones: 243; ureter stones 287) who received extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) (MFL5000; Dornier), from January 1995 to July 2002, retrospectively and determined whether the ureteral stent affected the incidence rate of stone street (SS). We also assessed the effect of ureteral stent on the subsequent management for SS. Forty patients (7.5%) developed SS. Twenty patients were inserted a ureteral stent prior to ESWL (stent group), and 20 patients were performed ESWL without a ureteral stent (in situ group). In the stent group, the most common (80.0%) location for SS was in the upper third ureter, while in the in situ group, SS mostly developed in the distal third ureter (60.0%). The incidence of SS did not differ significantly between the two groups when the size of renal and ureter stones was below 30 and 20 mm, respectively. When the renal stones were larger than above 30 mm, the incidence of SS in the stent group was significantly higher than that in the in situ group. SS disappeared spontaneously with stone passage in 10 of the patients in in situ group, but in only 1 patient in the stent group. In the stent group, 15 patients were treated for SS by removal of ureteral stent regardless of stone diameter. We conclude that ESWL should be performed without a ureteral stent when the stone diameter is below 20 mm. When the ureteral stent is thought to interfere with the delivery of stone fragments, the decision to remove it should be made as soon as possible.     

双J管在ESWL治疗巨大肾结石中的应用

目的：探讨双J管内引流在体外冲击波碎石术（ESWL）治疗巨大肾结石后防止石街发生的作用。方法：预置组73例巨大肾结石患者采用预置双J管，ESWL治疗；对照组29例均为拒绝手术和不愿置双J管而行ESWL的巨大肾结石患者。结果：预置组2例发生石街（2．7％），结石排净率为97．3％；对照组17例发生石街（58．6％），3例发生急性梗阻性肾功能衰竭，结石排净率为81．9％。两组差异有显著性意义（P＜0．05）。结论：双J管作为巨大肾结石患者ESWL治疗的辅助治疗能有效地防止石街的形成，有利于结石的排出，且操作简单，并发症少，适于推广应用。     

Comparison of pneumatic and Holmium laser ureteroscopic lithotripsy for upper third ureteral stones

ObjectiveTo evaluate the outcomes of ureteroscopic lithotripsy with pneumatic lithotripter and Holium:Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet (Ho:YAG) laser in the management of upper third ureteral stones.Materials and methodsPatients who underwent ureteroscopic lithotripsy with pneumatic lithotripter or Ho:YAG laser for upper third ureteral stones were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with urinary tract infection, radiolucent stones, loss of follow-up, concurrent middle or lower third ureteral stones or acute renal failure were excluded. Patient age, stone size and burden (based on KUB or computerized tomography), stone upward migration, double J stent insertion rate, stone free rate and secondary intervention rate for residual stones were compared in both groups.ResultsThere were 158 patients with 178 upper third ureteral stones (135 in pneumatic lithotripsy group and 43 in Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy group) meeting the study criteria. Patients' age, gender, stone laterality, stone size and burden were similar in both groups. The Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy group had better stone free rate, less double J stent insertion rate and less secondary intervention rate as compared with pneumatic lithotripsy (53.4% vs. 40.1%; 72.1% vs. 91.9%; 25% vs. 48.5% respectively, all p < 0.05). In patients with stones larger than 10 mm, Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy had significantly lower upward migration rate, lower double J stent insertion rate, higher stone free rate and less secondary intervention rate.ConclusionsHo:YAG laser lithotripsy is superior to pneumatic lithotripsy in the management of upper third ureteral stones in terms of double J stent insertion rate, stone free rate and secondary intervention rate for stones of all sizes. For stones larger than 10 mm, laser lithotripsy results in less stone upward migration.     

Two years clinical experiences with extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy and transurethral ureterolithotripsy for ureteral stones at Osaka City University Hospital

From July 1985 to June 1987, 303 patients with ureteral stones were treated by either extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) or transurethral ureterolithotripsy (TUL). The ureteral stones were classified into two groups, upper and lower ureteral stones. The upper ureteral stone was defined as a stone located above the pelvic brim in radiological examinations. ESWL was performed using a Dornier lithotriptor HM-3. For TUL, following the insertion of a guide wire and dilatation of the intramural ureter by ureteral bougie, a ureteroscope was introduced into the ureter. The success rate included both patients who became stone free and patients whose stones were disintegrated into less than 4 mm. The success rate of ESWL for upper ureteral stones was 90%, and 8.5% were treated subsequently by TUL. The success rate of TUL for upper ureteral stones was 42%, and the remaining required another session of TUL or another procedure, mainly ESWL. On the other hand, the success rate of TUL for lower ureteral stones was 71%, and the remainder also required another session of TUL or another procedure, mainly ESWL. The efficacy of TUL for stone street was comparably low by the evaluation done at 5 days after the procedure. However, almost all patients with stone street, which had developed after ESWL treatment, became stone free several weeks after TUL and insertion of a stent catheter. Major complications or side effects for ESWL were fever of more than 37.5 degrees C (7.5%) and pain attacks (8.9%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Do upper ureteral stones need to be manipulated (push back) into the kidneys before extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy?

The current practice for the management of upper ureteral stones is to push the stone back into the renal pelvis before extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL*). The results in 903 patients with an upper third ureteral stone pushed back before ESWL were compared to those of 815 with an upper third ureteral stone treated by ESWL in situ with a ureteral stent bypassing the stone. The stone size in the in situ group was larger than in the push back group. More shocks at a higher kilovoltage were required to treat the in situ group. The retreatment rate and post-ESWL secondary procedure rate for the push back group with single stones were 4% and 1.5%, respectively, compared to 5% and 7.5%, respectively, for the in situ group. The stone-free rate with single stones at 3 months was 73% in the push back group and 79% in the in situ group. There appears to be little advantage in manipulating a ureteral stone into the kidney (push back) before treatment by ESWL.     

输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治疗上尿路结石梗阻致急性肾功能衰竭的体会

目的探讨输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治疗上尿路结石梗阻致急性肾功能衰竭的疗效。方法2005年4月至2007年8月对25例上尿路结石梗阻致急性肾功能衰竭（血肌酐大于500μmol／L）患者行输尿管镜检查并行钬激光碎石术。结果25例患者肌酐恢复正常或接近正常，18例输尿管结石一次取净，5例经体外冲击波碎石后结石排出，2例碎石后肾盂残留小结石经121服排石药自行排出。结论对上尿路结石梗阻致急性肾功能衰竭患者，输尿管镜检查辅以钬激光碎石创伤小、疗效好，并可同时处理双侧输尿管结石。     

In situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for obstructing ureteral stones with acute renal colic.

In situ (no instrumentation) extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL*) was used to treat 49 patients with obstructing ureteral stones causing acute renal colic. Ureteral obstruction was diagnosed on the delayed films of an excretory urogram and was classified as severe (dilatation above and no contrast medium seen below the stone) in 17 patients and partial (dilatation above and contrast medium seen below the stone) in 32. Upper third ureteral stones were present in 41 patients (obstruction severe in 15 and partial in 26) and lower third ureteral stones were present in 8 (obstruction severe in 2 and partial in 6). ESWL was performed within 14 days of the onset of the acute renal colic because of persistent pain with an unmodified Dornier HM3 lithotriptor in 17 patients and a Medstone STS device in 32. With single stones the stone-free rate at 3 months, the repeat ESWL rate and the secondary procedure (stone basketing) rate were 92%, 6% and 8%, respectively, with severe obstruction, and 78%, 6% and 6%, respectively, with partial obstruction. No urinary drainage procedures for sepsis were required after ESWL. Obstructing ureteral stones, which presented mainly in the upper third of the ureter, were successfully treated with in situ ESWL without the need for either bypassing the stone with a ureteral stent or for pushing the stone back into the kidney before treatment with ESWL.     

Dormia支架在ESWL中的选择性应用

目的 探讨防止体外冲击波碎石（ＥＳＷＬ）治疗巨大肾结石后发生石街的方法。方法 采用ＥＳＷＬ结合预置Ｄｏｒｍｉａ支架的方法治疗巨大肾结石１５例,结果 全部患者术后均未发生嵌顿性石街,大部分结石粉末可通过拔除支架一同带出或沿支架自行排出,结论：Ｄｏｒｍｉａ支架作为巨大肾结石ＥＳＷＬ的辅助治疗工有有效地防止术后石街形成,促进碎石排出,但应注意掌握其适用范围和留置时限。     

Improvement of stone comminution by slow delivery rate of shock waves in extracorporeal lithotripsy

AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of delivery rate of shockwaves (SW) on stone comminution and treatment outcomes in patients with renal and ureteral stones. METHODS: Patients with radio-opaque stones in the upper urinary tract that were treated by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) were divided into two groups according to delivery rate (120 or 60 SW/min). The effective fragmentation after one ESWL session and treatment success at 3 months after ESWL was compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Of 134 patients (84 men and 50 women), 68 patients were treated at a fast rate and 66 were treated at a slow rate. Thirty and 38 patients in the fast rate group and 28 and 38 in the slow rate group had renal and ureteral stones, respectively. After one ESWL session, effective fragmentation was noted more often in the slow group (65.2%) than the fast group (47.1%) (P = 0.035), particularly for smaller stones (stone area <100 mm(2)) (P = 0.005) and renal stones (p = 0.005). However, there was no significant difference in treatment success at 3 months after ESWL between the two groups. In univariate logistic regression analysis, slow SW rate and smaller stones were significant factors for effective fragmentation after one ESWL session. In multivariate analysis, slow SW rate and smaller stones were also independent factors. CONCLUSIONS: Slow SW rate contributed to better stone comminution than fast rate, particularly for small stones and renal stones. ESWL treatment at a slow SW rate is recommended to obtain efficient stone fragmentation.     

经尿道输尿管镜联合体外震波碎石治疗输尿管结石256报告

目的探讨输尿管镜联合体外震波碎石（extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy，ESWL）治疗输尿管结石的价值。方法2005年10月-2007年6月采用输尿管镜联合ESWL治疗输尿管结石256例，中段（56例）及下段（170例）结石用输尿管镜取石，上段（30例）结石用ESWL碎石，输尿管镜取石失败或结石残留联合ESWL治疗。结果输尿管下段结石一期结石清除率98．2％（167／170），中段结石一期结石清除率89．2％（50／56），上段结石一期结石清除率73．3％（22／30）。输尿管穿孔3例，输尿管黏膜撕脱1例，结石远端输尿管扭曲进镜致使尿管穿孔改切开取石1例，输尿管镜取石失败或结石残留联合ESWL治疗二期结石清除率91．7％（11／12）。结论输尿管镜治疗输尿管下段及中段结石成功率高，输尿管镜取石失败或结石残留联合ESWL可提高二期结石清除率。