钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管上段结石110例

目的观察经尿道钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管上段结石的临床疗效及安全性。方法利用VersapulseSelect钬激光机经输尿管肾镜治疗110例输尿管上段结石病人,并以130例接受气压弹道碎石术的病人作为对照。结果110例输尿管结石患者一次手术结石粉碎率为96.4%(106例),平均结石排净时间2.5周;平均手术时间和术后住院天数分别为22min及2d。术中无输尿管穿孔、撕裂等并发症。而气压弹道碎石组中上述各项指标分别为86.9%3.1周、4.5min和5d,均与钬激光组有明显差异。结论钬激光碎石是治疗泌尿系结石一种安全、有效的腔道泌尿外科碎石方法。     

输尿管镜钬激光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治疗输尿管结石的效果。方法收集2016-01—2017-03间在中牟县人民医院接受输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗的60例输尿管结石患者,对其临床治疗进行回顾性分析。结果本组手术时间为(53.35±7.20) min,住院时间为(5.64±1.31) d。58例(96.67%)患者1次碎石成功;2例由于术中结石进入肾盂,遂置入双J管。1周后行体外冲击波成功碎石。术中发生1例输尿管穿孔,经留置双J管后治愈。术后2例发生泌尿系感染,给予抗感染治疗后痊愈。未发生输尿管狭窄等其他并发症。术后3个月复查,结石排净率为100.00%。结论对输尿管结石患者实施输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗,碎石成功率及结石排净率高,并发症少,安全性好。     

输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术与钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的比较

目的比较输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术与钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效和安全性。方法总结应用输尿管镜技术治疗326例输尿管结石患者的临床资料，其中气压弹道碎石术176例，钬激光碎石术150例。结杲钬激光碎石术碎石率为96．6％，高于气压弹道碎石术的89．8％（P〈0．01）；钬激光碎石术平均排净时间为10d，短于气压弹道碎石术的21d（P〈0．01）；钬激光碎石组有11例发生血尿，气压弹道碎石有54例发生血尿。结论钬激光碎石术的有效率和安全性优于气压弹道碎石术。钬激光碎石是治疗输尿管结石的一种安全、高效的方法。     

输尿管镜下双频双脉冲激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石

目的:探讨输尿管镜下双频双脉冲激光治疗输尿管结石的疗效.方法:采用双频双脉冲激光对342例(353侧)输尿管结石进行碎石.结果:342例中318例一次碎石成功(包括联合行经皮肾镜下肾结石激光碎石术的16例),治疗成功率为93.0%;住院2～8 d,平均3.5 d;碎石失败24例,其中发生输尿管损伤2例,改开放手术;结石移行人肾盂15例,置双J管后行ESWL;结石被息肉包裹6例,结石坚硬不能粉碎1例,行开放手术取石;未发生大出血等其它严重并发症.结论:输尿管镜下双频双脉冲碎石术具有快速、安全、微创、碎石成功率和结石排净率高、患者康复快等优点,是目前治疗输尿管结石的理想方法;但在治疗输尿管结石合并输尿管狭窄、息肉方面其有一定的局限性.     

经输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗泌尿系结石（附417例报告）

目的 探讨输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治疗泌尿系结石的疗效。方法 采用输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治疗泌尿系结石417例，其中肾结石43例，输尿管上段结石219例，输尿管下段结石198例，双侧输尿管结石27例，肾结石合并输尿管结石19例，膀胱结石8例，尿路结石1例。结果 钬激光碎石术的一次性碎石治疗后结石排净率为91％（378／417）。手术时间20～105min，平均51min；术后住院1～10天，平均5．3天；结石排净时间2～7周，平均3周。术中结石移位20例、输尿管穿孔6例、13例肾结石术中出血较多中途终止碎石术。结论 输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治疗泌尿系结石具有安全、有效、并发症少的特点，是治疗泌尿系结石的一种可靠方法。     

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。     

输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石(附104例报告)

目的探讨输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效。方法 2010年6月~2013年12月对104例输尿管结石(输尿管上段结石22例,中、下段结石82例)行输尿管镜下钬激光碎石,钬激光能量1.0~1.5 J,脉冲频率10~15Hz,采用蚕食法,从结石周边向中央行碎石治疗,将结石粉碎成直径3 mm颗粒。结果 97例一次碎石成功,成功率93.3%(97/104),其中上段结石碎石成功率77.3%(17/22),中、下段结石为97.6%(80/82)。3例结石冲回肾盂,改体外冲击波碎石治疗;4例因输尿管严重扭曲置镜失败,改开放手术。手术时间12~105 min,(44.5±21.7)min。术后住院时间3~7 d,(4.5±1.5)d。4例输尿管小穿孔,置双J管1个月后痊愈,无一例出现输尿管撕裂等较为严重的并发症;12例发生泌尿系感染与发热。97例随访1~12个月,平均4个月,术后1个月内结石全部排净。结论输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石安全,疗效可靠。     

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。     

经输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石62例

目的 探讨经输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效及并发症。方法 回顾总结我院2006年8月-2007年2月应用钬激光经输尿管镜治疗输尿管结石62例的临床资料。结果 本组一次碎石成功60例，失败2例；手术时间为30-160min（平均58．25min），住院时间4—8d（平均5．5d）；术后9例出现肉眼血尿，4例出现轻度发热，经对症处理后症状消失：术后随访3周结石排净率为93．55％（57／62），随访8周结石排净率为100％。结论经输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石安全可靠，具有疗效肯定、损伤小、住院时间短等优点。     

输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石536例报告

目的探讨输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的效果。方法回顾性分析536例输尿管结石，直径为0．5～2．0cm，均行输尿管硬镜钬激光碎石术治疗。结石合并息肉形成153例，采用钬激光汽化切割息肉。术后放置双J管2～6周。结果491例一次性碎石成功，成功率为91．6％（491／536），手术时间为15-75min，平均32min。术后1周结石排净率为72．5％（356／491），术后住院时间为1～4d，平均2．5d。结论输尿管镜钬激光碎石术是治疗输尿管结石安全有效的方法。     

U100激光碎石治疗输尿管结石的效果观察

目的:探讨输尿管镜下应用U100激光治疗输尿管结石的疗效。方法:对382例输尿管结石患者在输尿管镜下应用U100激光进行碎石治疗。结果:输尿管结石382例中,356例结石一次性粉碎成功,碎石成功率为93.2%。其中,输尿管上段结石一次碎石成功率为88.1%(104/118),中、下段结石一次碎石成功率为95.5%(252/264)。全部激光碎石成功的患者术后除出现血尿外,均无其他严重并发症发生。结论:U100激光碎石治疗输尿管结石具有快速、高效、安全、创伤小、操作简单等优点,可作为输尿管结石的首选治疗方法。     

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。     

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.     

Kombinierte flexible und semirigide Ureterorenoskopie mit Laserlithotripsie

BACKGROUND: Flexible ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy of intrarenal calculi is technically demanding and challenging due to potential dislocation from the calyx and damage to the tissue or the fiber optic during in situ laser lithotripsy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 12 consecutive patients ESWL resistant renal stones were collected with the flexible ureteroscope using the nitinol basket and repositioned into the renal pelvis. After removing the flexible ureteroscope from the ureter the stones were treated through an additionally inserted semirigid ureteroscope with frequency-doubled double-pulse Neodym:YAG (FREDDY) laser under direct vision. RESULTS: Operating time was on average 110 min. During the complication-free 3 month follow-up, 8 patients had complete success, 3 partial success, 1 patient had residual fragments >3 mm and 88% of lower pole calyces were stone-free. CONCLUSIONS: As an alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy, repositioning of renal stones to the renal pelvis with the flexible instrument allows in selected cases safe laser fragmentation through a semirigid instrument. Access or exposition-related problems can be solved and repair costs of the instruments will be minimized.     

A comparison of holmium:YAG laser with Lithoclast lithotripsy in ureteral calculi fragmentation

PURPOSE: Among various intracorporeal lithotriptors, Lithoclast (EMS, Switzerland) has become the widely used tool for the treatment of urinary stones. Recently, the holmium:YAG laser has been used with a wide range of potential urological applications, including intracorporeal lithotripsy of urinary calculi. The purpose of the present study is to compare Lithoclast with holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy in ureteral calculi fragmentation. METHODS: Out of 51 patients with ureteral calculi, 26 underwent Lithoclast lithotripsy and 25 holmium:YAG lithotripsy using a 8/9.8F rigid ureteroscope. There were no changes to the ureteroscopes, video monitors, baskets or irrigation devices during the study period. RESULTS: There were no differences in patient age, sex, stone size and location of stones between these groups. The immediate stone-free rates were 96.0% in the holmium:YAG group and 73.1% in the Lithoclast group (P < 0.05). The 3-month stone-free rates were 96.0% and 84.6%, respectively (P = 0.350). The mean operation time and mean period of postoperative hospitalization in the holmium:YAG group (49.8 min and 1.0 days, respectively) were shorter than those of the Lithoclast counterpart (76.9 min and 2.5 days, respectively). Post-treatment complications, such as ureteral perforation, were encountered in only two patients who underwent Lithoclast. CONCLUSIONS: Holmium:YAG lithotripsy was associated with shorter operation time and postoperative hospitalization period. These data also suggest that holmium:YAG lithotripsy was safe and more effective than Lithoclast lithotripsy in the aspect of immediate stone free rate. We believe that holmium:YAG laser is an excellent treatment modality for managing ureteral calculi.     

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&#177;0．6）cm降至（1．4&#177;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。     

急诊输尿管镜钬激光碎石与体外冲击波碎石治疗输尿管结石并急性肾绞痛的疗效比较

目的比较急诊输尿管镜钬激光碎石（URL）与急诊体外冲击波碎石（ESWL）两种方法治疗输尿管结石引起的急性肾绞痛的疗效。方法2006年1月至2008年9月，采用Storz8／9F硬质输尿管镜、钬激光碎石机和DornierCompactS型低能量电磁式碎石机分别急诊治疗输尿管结石并肾绞痛175例和110例。所有病例均先行药物治疗症状无缓解后在急诊初诊12h之内接受急诊URL或急诊ESWL。结果对于输尿管上段结石，术后疼痛缓解率URL组虽优于ESWL组（93．94％和66．67％，P〈O．05），但碎石成功率（84．85％和83．33％，P〉0．05）及二周结石排净率（81．81％和77．78％，P〉0．05）均无显著差异。而对于输尿管中下段结石，术后疼痛缓解率（98．59％和92．39％）、碎石成功率（98．59％和91．30％）以及二周结石排净率（97．18％和94．78％）URL组均优于ESWL组fP〈0．05）。最大径10mm以内的结石URL组碎石成功率优于ESWL组（96．38和88．10％，P〈0．05）。最大径10mm以上的结石，术岳疼痛缓解率及2周排净率URL组均优于ESWL组（97．30％和69．23％，91．89％和61．23％，P〈0．05）。5RL及ESWL组并发症率分别为3．46％和2．73％（P〉0．05）。结论急诊URL和急诊ESWL均是输尿营结石并急性肾绞痛的安全、有效的治疗方法，对于输尿管上段结石或最大径不超过10mm的结石二首效果相当，而对于输尿管中下段结石或直径大于10rllm的结石来说，URL疗效优于ESWL。