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。     

气压弹道碎石术与钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的比较

目的：比较经输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术与钬激光石术治疗输尿结石的疗效和安全性。方法：总结应用输尿管镜技术治疗285例尿管结石患者的临床资料,其中气压弹道碎石术145例,钬激光碎石术140例。结果钬激光碎石术单次手术碎石率为95．75,高于气压弹道碎石术的69．7％,P＜0．01;钬激光碎石术平均结石排净时间为18d,短于气压弹道碎石术的31d,P＜0．01;钬激光碎石组无明显并发症发生,气压弹道碎石组有5例发生穿孔。结论钬激光碎石术的有效率和安全性优于气压弹碎石术,钬激光碎石术是治疗输尿管结石的一种安全、有高效的方法。     

钬激光与气压弹道碎石治疗输尿管上段结石的对比研究

目的：比较钬激光碎石术和气压弹道碎石术处理输尿管上段结石的疗效及安全性。方法：应用输尿管镜下钬激光及气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管上段结石共135例,其中钬激光碎石治疗51例,气压弹道碎石治疗84例,进行疗效、安全性等方面的比较。结果：钬激光碎石组和气压弹道碎石组的结石一次粉碎率分别为90．2％和76．2％（P〈0．05）,平均手术时间前者（49．43min）较后者短（59．24min）（P〈0．05）。钬激光组出现输尿管穿孔1例。气压弹道组出现穿孔6例。结论：治疗输尿管上段结石钬激光较气压弹道碎石具有一定的优势,是一种安全有效的碎石方法。     

输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石和钬激光碎石治疗输尿管结石206例临床分析

目的：探讨输尿管镜碎石术（URL）治疗输尿管结石的疗效。方法：分别采用气压弹道碎石106例,钬激光碎石100例,并总结各自优缺点。结果：气压弹道组的输尿管上、中、下段碎石成功率分别为70％、93％和95％;钬激光组为88％、89％和96％。两组间碎石总成功率差异无统计学意义,但上段钬激光碎石成功率明显高于气压弹道碎石（P〈0．05）。结论：输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术和钬激光碎石术均是治疗输尿管结石的安全、有效方法,其中钬激光碎石术手术适应证更广。严格操作方法是两种手术成功的保证。     

输尿管镜下钬激光与气压弹道治疗输尿管中下段结石并息肉的疗效比较

目的：比较钬激光与气压弹道碎石治疗输尿管中下段结石并息肉的有效性及安全性。方法：回顾性分析我院2006年1月-2012年12月输尿管镜下治疗输尿管结石患者的临床资料,钬激光碎石组90例,气压弹道碎石组88例,比较两组手术时间、结石排净率及输尿管狭窄的发生率等。结果：两组均无中转开放病例。钬激光碎石一次性粉碎率为100％,一次性取净率为97．8％（88／90）;气压弹道碎石一次性粉碎率为100％,一次性取净率为95．5％（84／88）。钬激光碎石组与气压弹道碎石组结石清除率的差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。但钬激光组输尿管穿孔率为8．9％（8／90）,气压弹道组为1．1％（1／88）;钬激光组出现输尿管狭窄率为11．1％（10／90）,气压弹道组仅2．3％（2／88）,差异均有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论：输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术和气压弹道碎石术均可有效治疗合并息肉形成的中下段输尿管结石,但气压弹道碎石术的安全性更高。     

输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石186例报告

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。方法对186例输尿管结石行输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术治疗。结果36例输尿管上段结石气压弹道碎石成功率80．6％（29／36）；55例输尿管中段结石气压弹道碎石成功率92．7％（51／55）；95例输尿管下段结石气压弹道碎石成功率100％（95／95）。术中发生输尿管损伤5例（2．7％）。术后4周复查结石清除率94．1％（175／186）。结论经尿道输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术是治疗输尿管结石的一种安全、有效的方法。     

输尿管镜气压弹道与钬激光碎石治疗输尿管结石的临床分析

目的探讨输尿管镜气压弹道与钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析我院自2003年1月至2010年12月采用输尿管镜气压弹道碎石治疗输尿管结石301例,钬激光碎石治疗输尿管结石114例的临床资料,比较其碎石效果、手术时间、术后住院时间及并发症发生率等。结果气压弹道碎石一次性粉碎率为98．0％（295／301）,一次性取净率为90．7％（273/301）,一侧手术平均时间56．7±15．2min,术后平均住院时间6.8±2.3d;钬激光碎石一次性粉碎率为99．1％（113/114）,一次性取净率为90．4％（103／114）,一侧手术平均时间47．4±13．7min,术后平均住院时间4．3±1．9d。两组均未见输尿管穿孔等并发症。钬激光碎石组手术平均时间及术后平均住院时间明显少于气压弹道碎石组。结石清除率无显著差异。结论输尿管镜气压弹道与钬激光碎石两种方式治疗输尿管结石均安全有效,但钬激光碎石效率更高,术后恢复更快。     

输尿管镜碎石术治疗输尿管结石临床分析(附100例报告)

目的:探讨输尿管镜碎石术(URL)治疗输尿管结石的操作方法和临床疗效。方法:采用输尿管镜下气压弹道与钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石100例。结果:输尿管上、中、下段结石排净率分别为58%、83%和100%;并发症发生率为8%(8/100例),主要为术中输尿管穿孔3例和术后血尿、高热5例。结论:输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术和钬激光碎石术均是治疗输尿管结石的安全有效的方法,其中钬激光碎石术适应证更广泛。     

输尿管镜碎石术治疗输尿管结石（附305例报告）

目的探讨输尿管镜碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效,对比气压弹道和钬激两种常用腔内碎石设备的优缺点。方法采用输尿管镜下气压弹道或钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石。结果一次性碎石成功率95.4%,1周内结石排净率90.1%,术中并发症发生率3.6%,术后并发症发生率4.6%,并积极对症治疗并发症。结论输尿管镜下钬激光或气压弹道碎石术是治疗输尿管结石的安全有效的方法,尤其适用于输尿管下段结石,其中钬激光碎石适应征更广泛。     

输尿管镜钬激光碎石治疗嵌顿输尿管结石临床分析

目的：探讨输尿管镜钬激光碎石治疗嵌顿输尿管结石的有效性和安全性。方法：分析2005年10月～2008年5月输尿管镜下钬激光碎石治疗嵌顿输尿管结石268例患者临床资料，对碎石率、排石率和并发症等进行统计分析。结果：共行272例次输尿管镜钬激光碎石，一次碎石成功率为92．6％（252／272），输尿管上段与中、下段结石一次碎石成功率分别为84．6％（66／78）、95．9％（186／194）；平均手术时间35min。平均碎石时间16min；结石移位改行ESWL8例，结石位置较高改行微创经皮肾镜取石9例，改开放手术取石3例；碎石过程中黏膜撕裂4例、黏膜下假道形成6例，输尿管穿孔4例；18例术后发热（体温〉38．5℃，持续2天以上），5例出现体温〉39℃，其中1例发生感染性休克前兆；术后住院2～6天；2周～1个月拔除双J管，复查B超、KUB、IVP，结石排净率97．1％（264／272），肾盂积水由（2．6±0．6）cm降至（1．4±0．4）cm（P〈0．01）；随访3～24个月，3例发现输尿管狭窄。结论：输尿管镜钬激光碎石治疗嵌顿输尿管结石安全、有效，尤其适用于中、下段嵌顿输尿管结石。     

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.     

钬激光碎石术与双频双脉冲激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的比较

目的:比较经输尿管镜钬激光碎石术和双频双脉冲激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效与安全性。方法:对输尿管镜技术治疗101例输尿管结石患者,以钬激光碎石术治疗46例,双频双脉冲激光碎石术治疗55例,进行疗效比较。结果:钬激光碎石术结石一次粉碎率为91.3%,双频双脉冲激光碎石术结石一次粉碎率为87.3%;前者平均碎石时间(28.9min)短于后者(37.9min)(P<0.01);前者平均结石排净时间为16.5d,短于后者的26.3d(P<0.01);前者2例发生穿孔,后者无穿孔发生。结论:钬激光碎石术及双频双脉冲碎石术均为有效的碎石方法;在平均碎石时间、结石排净时间方面钬激光碎石术具有优势;双频双脉冲激光碎石术在安全性方面具有优势。     

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.     

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.     

The frequency-doubled double-pulse Neodym:YAG laser lithotripter (FREDDY) in lithotripsy of urinary stones. First clinical experience

Laser lithotripsy does not play an important role in urinary stone treatment, mostly due to ineffective fragmentation efficiency, and high purchase and maintenance costs. The aim of the following retrospective study was to show the clinical significance and efficiency of an innovative laser lithotripsy system for urinary stone treatment. Between November 1998 and October 1999, 48 patients were treated with the innovative frequency- doubled double-pulse Neodym: YAG laser lithotripter FREDDY. A total of 50 renal units were treated, 43 ureteroscopically, four ureterorenoscopically, three percutaneous-nephroscopically, and one bladder stone cystoscopically. With a median laser operation time of 5 min (range: 1-30 min) and a total procedure duration of 60 min (range: 15-180 min), a stone-free rate of upper ureteral stones of 62%, middle ureteral stones of 91% and distal ureteral stones of 100% were documented on the first day after treatment. In an observation period of 6 months, no complications were seen. In our experience Laser lithotripsy with FREDDY is an effective, simple and reliable method for the treatment of ureteral stones, with low purchase and maintenance costs. The extremely thin and highly flexible quartz fibre may extend the endoscopic spectrum to otherwise poorly accessible upper ureteral stones, the renal pelvis and renal calix stones. Therefore, a prospective validation study for comparison with ballistic lithotriptors is of great interest.     

输尿管肾镜联合钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石

目的探讨经输尿管肾镜联合钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的有效性及安全性。方法分析2005年1月至2006年12月收治的经输尿管肾镜钬激光治疗输尿管结石206例的临床资料。其中181例伴有患侧轻至中度肾盂积水,IVP患肾不显影19例,28例同时合并结石远端输尿管狭窄,57例合并有息肉或肉芽组织包裹,26例为体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)治疗失败。结果206例中195例单次手术碎石成功,单次手术结石粉碎率达94.7%(195/206)。平均手术时间25min,术中无输尿管穿孔等并发症发生,平均住院日5.5d。10例结石在钬激光碎石过程中移位于肾盏或结石残留,术后再行ESWL治愈;1例双侧输尿管结石,因输尿管狭窄无法入镜,中转开放手术。结论输尿管肾镜联合钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石有效、安全,可作为输尿管结石特别是中下段结石首选的治疗方法。     

Endoscopic lithotripsy and the FREDDY laser: initial experience

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The frequency-doubled double-pulse neodymium:YAG (FREDDY) laser has been developed for endoscopic lithotripsy and combines the characteristics of solid and dye lasers with a thin flexible optical fiber enabling it to be used with flexible ureterorenoscopy. Furthermore, it is less expensive and easier to maintain than other lasers. Our goal was to evaluate its efficacy and role in the ureteroscopic treatment of urinary stones. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used a FREDDY laser in 26 patients (29 stones). For 4 stone cases, this was the first line of treatment; for the remaining cases, this was the second line of treatment, following SWL in 23 cases and nephrolithotomy in 2 cases. The mean stone size was 9 mm, with a range of 6 to 15 mm. There were 13 renal and 16 ureteral stones. The absence of residual fragments at 3-month postoperative radiography was considered to reflect successful treatment. RESULTS: Twenty-six stones were treated with satisfactory results. Within 3 months, 18 patients were stone free (69%), and 72.4% of the stones (21/29) had been treated completely. Fragments of 8 stones still remained in 8 patients. Of these stones, 5 were >10 mm and persisted at 3 months. Fragmentation was ineffective for 2 cystine stones and poor for 1 calcium oxalate monohydrate stone. Hospitalization, on average, was 1.5 days with a range of 1 to 3 days. A ureteral perforation was observed in the case of an impacted ureteral stone. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the wavelengths used, endoscopic FREDDY laser lithotripsy is an effective and harmless method. This laser can be used as a therapeutic tool because of its moderate cost and ability to be used with flexible ureterorenoscopy. However, it is important to be aware of the FREDDY laser's limited fragmentation capabilities for cystine stones and its inability to treat tissue lesions such as urinary-tract stenosis and tumors.     

钬激光碎石术治疗泌尿系结石(附1 216例报告)

目的探讨钬激光碎石术治疗泌尿系结石的疗效及其安全性。方法应用输尿管肾镜和膀胱镜联合钬激光碎石术治疗1216例泌尿系结石，其中输尿管结石1006例（上段302例，中段364例，下段340例），膀胱结石210例。结果l例输尿管上段结石因前列腺增生症致置镜困难改体外冲击波碎石（extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy,ESWL）治疗。l006例输尿管结石单次碎石成功率95．5％（961／1006）），其中上、中、下段结石单次碎石成功率分别为89．4％（270／302）、96．4％（351／364）和100％（340／340），术中发生6例输尿管穿孔。膀胱结石单次碎石成功率为100％（210／210），无出血和膀胱穿孔发生。881例输尿管结石术后随访0．5—40个月，平均18．6月，输尿管上、中、下段结石排净率分别为91．1％（224／246）、98.5％（318／323）、100％（312／312），总结石排净率为96．9％（854／881）；6例发生输尿管狭窄。187例膀胱结石术后随访0.5～31个月，平均12．4月，结石排净率98．4％（184／187）。结论钬激光碎石术治疗泌尿系结石疗高效、微创、安全，是输尿管结石和膀胱结石首选治疗方法。