腔内治疗膀胱结石950例小结

我院自1986年9月至1998年1月采用腔内泌尿技术治疗膀胱结石950例,其中液电碎石术716例,气压碎石术198例,膀胱窥镜碎石术51例。三种治疗结果表明:气压碎石术优于液电碎石术及膀胱窥镜碎石术,它具有安全、高效和无电、热损伤等优点。     

B膀胱造瘘改良法治疗膀胱大结石

目的：探讨膀胱造瘘加自制水封（防水帽）经电切镜外鞘输尿管镜气压弹道碎石联合大力碎石钳碎石治疗膀胱大结石（〉2．5cm）的疗效。方法：膀胱造瘘下经尿道置入电切镜外鞘,套上自制水封,输尿管镜经水封沿电切镜外鞘气压弹道碎石联合大力钳碎石治疗膀胱大结石35例,22例合并BPH,其中有18患者同期干亍经尿道前列腺电切术（TuRP）。结果：患者均一次碎石成功,无严重出血、严重尿外渗、尿道假道、膀胱破裂等并发症发生,无一例中转开放手术。术后随访3～13个月,无远期并发症。结论：该方法具有安全可靠、损伤小、手术时间短、并发症少、适应证广的优点。     

Clinical outcome of ureteroscopic lithotripsy for 2,129 patients with ureteral stones

The objective of this study was to retrospectively analyze the clinical outcomes of ureteroscopic lithotripsy (USL) performed in patients with ureteral stones, and to investigate the factors associated with therapeutic outcomes. This study included a total of 2,129 patients with ureteral stones who underwent USL between December 1985 and March 2006 in a single institution in Japan. In this series, ultrasonic lithotripsy was primarily performed, and forceps and/or baskets were occasionally used for the removal of stones. Complete removal was defined as total clearance 1 day after the initial USL. The initial stone-free rate following a single treatment with USL was 73.3%. Of 569 patients diagnosed as having fragmentation of residual stones, additional therapy was not performed for 115 with stones likely to pass spontaneously, while the remaining 454 subsequently underwent extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Thereafter, ureterolithotomy or percutaneous nephrolithotripsy was further added in 14. Ureteral perforation occurred in 14 patients, of whom 2 underwent nephrectomy; however, there were no other serious complications that could not be managed by conservative treatment. Whether ureteral stones were completely removed by an initial USL was significantly associated with the history of ureteral stone, severity of clinical symptoms, number of stones, localization of stones and maximal diameter of stones. Furthermore, multivariate analysis identified the severity of clinical symptoms, number of stones, localization of stones and maximal diameter of stones as independent predictors for complete removal of ureteral stones by the initial USL application. These findings suggest that USL could be a safe and effective treatment option for ureteral stones; however, other therapeutic strategies should also be considered in patients with currently identified risk factors associated with treatment failure following a single USL procedure.     

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.     

输尿管镜下超声与气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管上段结石并急性梗阻性尿毒症的比较

目的 比较输尿管镜下超声碎石术与气压弹道碎石术治疗并发急性梗阻性尿毒症的输尿管上段结石的临床疗效及其优缺点.方法 回顾性分析我院2009年5月至2012年5月的104例输尿管上段结石并发急性梗阻性尿毒症患者的临床资料.采用输尿管镜下超声碎石术（组1）和输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术（组2）治疗的患者各52例,统计并比较两组的住院时间、手术时间、术中出血量、结石清除率及并发症发生情况.结果 两组患者术后肾功能均在短期内恢复正常,组1与组2相比较,组1结石清除率高、手术时间短、住院时间短、术后感染率低,组间比较差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）.两组均无输尿管穿孔、撕脱等并发症.结论 输尿管镜下超声碎石术治疗输尿管上段结石并发急性梗阻性尿毒症是一种安全、有效的理想手术方法,不增加手术并发症.     

经皮肾取石术中钬激光与气压弹道的疗效比较

目的 比较钬激光碎石术（LL）与气压弹道碎石术（PL）在经皮肾穿刺取石术（PCNL）中的疗效和安全性.方法 128例肾结石患者,其中采用PL治疗49例,采用LL治疗79例.结果 LL组在手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间和并发症发生率方面均低于PL组（P〈0.05）,分别为（72.4±2.3）min与（100.5±1.9）min,（75.8±5.3）ml与（91.4±4.3）ml,（5.1±1.2）d与vs（8.2±1.1）d,1.3% 与10.2%;LL组一次碎石成功率则高于PL组,LL为92.1%,PL为71.2%（P〈0.05）.结论 LL的疗效和安全性优于PL,在PCNL中更适合,更安全和高效.     

Comparision of intracorporeal lithotripsy methods and forceps use for distal ureteral stones: Seven years experience

Objectives: To evaluate and to compare the safety and efficacy of ureteroscopic lithotripsy methods and forceps use for distal ureteral stones. Materials and methods: 514 patients were evaluated retrospectively who were treated by dye laser, electrohydraulic or ultrasonic lithotripsy or direct forceps extraction for distal ureteral stones between May 1992–October 1999. Results: Laser lithotripsy was determined to be the most effective method with 86.9% success, while ultrasonic lithotripsy was the least effective method with 77.3% success rate. For smaller stones forceps extraction had a 88.5% success rate. Conclusion: Ureteroscopic lithotripsy methods are all alternative choice of treatment methods in distal ureteral stones. Toour experience, laser lithotripsy is the most effective method of all intracorporeal lithotripsy methods as far as the success and complication rates are concerned. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

输尿管镜钬激光碎石与气压弹道碎石的比较

目的：比较输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术与气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效与安全性。方法：回顾性分析输尿管镜下治疗76例输尿管结石患者的临床资料，其中采用钬激光碎石治疗36例（钬激光组）．气压弹道碎石治疗40例（气压弹道组）。结果：钬激光组平均术中碎石时间为8min，明显短于气压弹道组15min（P〈0．01）。钬激光组碎石成功率为97．2％，明显高于气压弹道碎石组的87．5％（P〈0．01）。两组手术均较安全，无明显相关并发症出现。结论：钬激光碎石术的有效性优于气压弹道碎石术，是一种治疗输尿管结石安全、高效的方法。     

输尿管镜微创碎石术与ESWL治疗输尿管结石的临床分析

目的探讨输尿管镜微创气压弹道碎石术（URSL）与体外震波碎石术（ESWL）治疗输尿管结石的临床疗效。方法对2000年1月-2005年12月分别使用URSL与ESWL治疗输尿管结石641例患者的临床资料进行回顾分析。结果URSL治疗总有效率为95．5％，明显高于ESWL治疗的总有效率72．1％（P〈0．01）。结论采用URSL治疗输尿管中、下段结石疗效确切、安全性高、创伤小、恢复快，优于ESWL；治疗输尿管上段结石用ESWL疗效较URSL理想。     

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。     

经尿道肾镜下气压弹道联合超声碎石清石术治疗膀胱结石

目的探讨经尿道肾镜下气压弹道联合超声碎石清石术治疗膀胱结石的疗效。方法2005年10月～2008年5月,膀胱结石69例（男63例,女6例）,结石直径1.5～6.0 cm,其中合并前列腺增生55例,神经源性膀胱14例,膀胱憩室结石4例。经尿道置入Wolf F20.8肾镜,采用瑞士EMS公司第3代气压弹道联合超声碎石清石系统治疗膀胱结石69例。气压弹道频率调至8～12 Hz,超声能量设定为50%～60%。合并前列腺增生应用前列腺汽化电切术。结果68例一次碎石、清石成功,手术时间15～40 min,平均25 min。1例膀胱憩室结石术中出现膀胱破裂,改行开放手术。无一例出现尿道狭窄、感染、大出血等严重并发症。68例随访6～10个月,平均9个月,B超或X线腹部平片检查未见结石复发。结论经尿道肾镜下气压弹道联合超声碎石清石术治疗膀胱结石疗效满意。     

URS-PL和ESWL治疗输尿管结石的有效性和安全性分析

目的：比较输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术（URS-PL）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,以便临床医师选择正确的治疗方案。方法：收集本院输尿管结石患者288例,经ESWL治疗174例,其中结石位于骶髂关节以上105例,骶髂关节以下69例;经URS-PL治疗114例（包括ESWL治疗失败后改行URS-PL者35例）,其中骶髂关节以上结石31例,骶髂关节以下结石83例;后根据临床资料进行整理、归纳、统计、分析。结果：经ESWL治疗组骶髂关节以上、骶髂关节以下排石率分别为79．05％、57．97％;年龄≥55岁及〈55岁患者的排石率分别为58．49％、76．03％;结石直径≥1cm及〈1cm患者的排石率分别为59．15％、76．99％;经URS-PL治疗组骶髂关节以上、骶髂关节以下排石率分别为80．65％、93．98％;年龄≥55岁及〈55岁患者的排石率分别为88．00％、91．01％;结石直径≥1cm及〈1cm患者的排石率分别为88．24％、91．25％。结论：在治疗骶髂关节以上结石上,URS-PL和ESWL的疗效无明显的统计学差别（P〉0．05）;而在治疗骶髂关节以下结石上,URS-PL的疗效明显优于ESWL（P〈0．05）;经过ESWL后行URS-PL和初次行URS-PL的差别没有统计学意义。     

经尿道输尿管镜联合微通道经皮肾镜治疗输尿管上段嵌顿结石

目的：探讨输尿管上段嵌顿结石的治疗和微创治疗的安全性和有效性.方法：2005年2月～2009年6月间利用经尿道输尿管镜碎石术（URSL）联合微通道经皮肾镜取石术（PCNL）治疗输尿管上段嵌顿结石168例,其中并发肾下盏结石者55例,因发热而诊断为脓肾者12例.结果：168例输尿管上段嵌顿结石患者,因为并发输尿管息肉或水肿而结石包裹,结石较硬或严重粘连,URSL后即行微通道PCNL,Ⅰ期手术结石取净率为98.2%（165/168）,手术时间60～110 min,平均85 min,术中未发生输尿管穿孔及输尿管黏膜撕脱、大出血等并发症.住院时间10～15天.结论：对于输尿管上段嵌顿结石,URSL治疗不满意时,可以联合微通道PCNL.此方法具有微创、安全、效率高等特点,可作为上尿路结石微创治疗方法的补充.     

经皮肾微造瘘气压弹道碎石取石术治疗复杂性肾结石

目的总结经皮肾微造瘘取石术（MPCNL）配合气压弹道碎石治疗复杂性肾结石的经验。方法本组复杂性肾结石患者53例，男29例，女24例；其中单侧复杂性肾结石45例，双侧8例。先采用经皮肾微造瘘气压弹道碎石取石术治疗，较大残留结行再行体外冲击波碎石术（ESWL）。结果一次取石45例，二次取石3例，5例残留结石，配合ESWL，结石取净率93．4％。平均手术时间为95min，出血100-800ml，无大出血、尿瘘、气胸、假性尿液囊肿、腹腔脏器损伤等严重的并发症。结论MPCNL配合气压弹道碎石治疗复杂性肾结石安全、有效。具有损伤小、出血少、恢复快等的优点。     

输尿管镜下钬激光碎石与气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效比较

目的 比较输尿管镜下钬激光碎石与气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石的临床效果.方法 回顾分析2009年1月至2011年2月输尿管镜下治疗输尿管结石459例临床资料,其中钬激光碎石术267例(312侧),气压弹道碎石术192例(220侧).结果 钬激光组260例(305侧)碎石成功,碎石总成功率97.76%;气压弹道组177例(205侧)碎石成功,碎石总成功率93.18%.术后4~6周随访,两组结石排净率分别为98.69%、94.15%,碎石成功率、结石排净率均有显著性差异.结论 输尿管镜下钬激光和气压弹道碎石术均是治疗输尿管结石的好方法,但在碎石成功率、结石排净率以及在处理输尿管结石合并息肉、狭窄时,钦激光具有更大的优势.     

三种膀胱结石治疗方法的临床比较

目的:探讨开放手术、钬激光及超声波负压吸引联合气压弹道碎石清石系统在膀胱结石治疗中的临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析我院2006年5月～2009年8月收治104例膀胱结石患者的治疗方法。A组应用膀胱切开取石23例;B组应用钬激光碎石42例;C组应用超声波负压吸引联合气压弹道碎石清石系统碎石39例。分析比较三种方法在膀胱结石治疗中的差异。结果:A、B、C三组碎石清石的操作时间分别为(24.04±3.70)min、(41.88±17.30)min、(34.05±13.03)min,A组显著小于其他两组(P0.01),C组明显小于B组(P0.05),随结石长径增大,微创手术组操作时间明显延长。A、B、C三组的住院天数分别为(13.13±4.79)天、(11.38±3.36)天、(9.51±1.72)天,A组明显大于B组(P0.05)及C组(P0.01);C组明显小于B组(P0.05)。A、B、C三组的术后留置导尿时间分别为(7.00±2.54)天、(5.05±1.51)天、(4.03±0.99)天,A组显著大于其他两组(P0.01),C组显著小于B组(P0.01)。结论:超声波负压吸引联合气压弹道碎石清石系统在膀胱结石治疗中创伤小,安全,高效,患者恢复快;前列腺增生症并发膀胱结石可应用微创方式治疗;结石长径4 cm以上者可考虑行开放手术。     

Combined electrohydraulic and holmium:yag laser ureteroscopic nephrolithotripsy for 20 to 40 mm renal calculi

PURPOSE: Percutaneous nephrolithotripsy is standard treatment for renal calculi greater than 2 cm. Modern flexible ureteroscopes using the complementary effects of electrohydraulic (EHL) and Ho:YAG laser lithotrites can treat 2 to 4 cm renal calculi in minimally invasive fashion with similar or superior results. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of ureteroscopic nephrolithotripsy for the management of 2 to 4 cm renal calculi in a community setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2001 and November 2002 all 15 patients presenting with renal calculi 22 to 42 mm long (mean 33) and 275 to 650 mm in area (mean 396), of whom 40% had infection, underwent flexible ureteroscopic nephrolithotripsy. A total of 13 patients had 3-month followup data. Hard stone components, namely calcium oxalate monohydrate and/or apatite, were present in 13 cases (87%). Treatment principles were the aggressive treatment of infection, EHL stone debulking, Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy to weaken hard stones structurally, manual piston irrigation to maintain visibility, bladder drainage to maintain low intrarenal pressures, minimum 6-hour postoperative observation and physiological passage of stone fragments. RESULTS: In the 13 patients with 3-month followup data the stone clearance rate was 92% for complete stone free status and 100% for fragments less than 4 mm. This result was achieved at 1 stage in 10 cases 13 (77%) and at 2 to 4 stages in 1 each. Mean procedure time per stage was 47 minutes (range 25 to 90) and total procedure time per patient was 66 minutes (range 25 to 240). There was no significant change in mean preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin (p = 0.87) and creatinine (p = 0.85) in the 16 of 21 procedures for which data were available. Procedures were done on an outpatient basis except in 1 patient, who was hospitalized overnight for the management of preexisting pulmonary problems. One rehospitalization for colic management but no other unplanned emergency department or clinic visits occurred. All patients were rendered infection-free and symptom-free. CONCLUSIONS: Combined EHL and Ho:YAG laser flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy can be an effective treatment with low morbidity. As such, it provides an attractive, minimally invasive alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotripsy or open surgery in patients with 2 to 4 cm renal calculi.     

Treatment of proximal ureteral calculi: holmium:YAG laser ureterolithotripsy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

PURPOSE: We compared the safety and efficacy of ureteroscopy with intracorporeal holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) (Dornier Medical Systems, Inc., Marietta, Georgia) for proximal ureteral calculi. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 67 patients underwent 81 primary procedures, including in situ ESWL with a DoLi 50 lithotriptor (Dornier Medical Systems, Inc.) or ureteroscopy combined with holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for proximal ureteral calculi. RESULTS: Of the primary procedures 81 involved proximal ureteral calculi, including 35 done for calculi 1 cm. or greater. The initial stone-free rate in patients with calculi 1 cm. or greater was 93% for ureteroscopy combined with holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy and 50% for in situ ESWL. The efficiency quotient for treating proximal ureteral calculi 1 cm. or greater was calculated as 0.76 for ureteroscopic lithotripsy and 0.43 for ESWL. For proximal ureteral calculi less than 1 cm. the initial stone-free rate was 100% and 80% for ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy and ESWL, respectively. The efficiency quotient was calculated as 0.81 for ureteroscopic lithotripsy and 0.72 for ESWL for treating proximal ureteral calculi less than 1 cm. There were no major complications in either group and all procedures were performed on an outpatient basis. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that ureteroscopy combined with holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy is an acceptable treatment modality for all proximal ureteral calculi and excellent results are achieved for calculi 1 cm. or larger. Although the stone-free rate was better for smaller stones with ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy, efficiency quotients were similar. Therefore, ESWL should remain first line therapy for proximal ureteral calculi less than 1 cm. because of less morbidity, and a lesser anesthesia and analgesic requirement.     

结石远端狭窄导致输尿管镜碎石失败的处理

目的探讨因结石远端输尿管狭窄而导致经尿道输尿管镜碎石术失败的处理方式。方法回顾性研究我院14例输尿管镜碎石术镜体上行失败患者资料及处理方法,结石长径0.6~1.4cm,横径0.5~1.0cm,输尿管上段结石4例,中段结石4例,下段结石6例。结果 3例行一期输尿管切开取石术,9例行输尿管扩张后二期输尿管镜碎石术,其中6例成功,失败3例改行输尿管切开取石术,另余2例行留置输尿管双J管的体外冲击波碎石术治愈。结论一期输尿管镜碎石术术中镜体上行失败的患者可尝试留置输尿管双J管或结石远端输尿管导管,2~4周内再次行输尿管镜碎石术有望获得较高的手术成功率。