输尿管上段结石的微创手术治疗

目的：探讨输尿管上段结石的治疗方法。方法：回顾性分析输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石(URSL），后腹腔镜输尿管切开取石(RLU)、经皮肾穿刺取石(PCNL)治疗输尿管上段结石患者的临床资料。其中URSL组25例，RLU组20例。PCNL组9例。结果：URSL组碎石成功18例；7例不成功，其中3例改为开放手术，1例改为后腹腔镜取石。2例行ESWL术，1例仅留置双J管。术后1个月拔管后自行排出。2例并发输尿管穿孔。RLU组取石成功18例，2例滑入肾内，经配合输尿管镜和腹腔镜直视下经皮肾穿刺取石成功，术后15例有伤口漏尿。PCNL组成功9例，无并发症。结论：USRL创伤小。术后恢复快。是治疗输尿管上段结石的较为满意的治疗方法。PCNL创伤小，取石成功率高，在结石靠近肾盂、儿童输尿管上段结石并同侧肾结石和结石以下输尿管狭窄时应优先考虑。但技术难度较大。RLU可作为URSL不成功后的辅助治疗方法。     

Three-dimensional assessment of urinary stone on non-contrast helical computed tomography as the predictor of stonestreet formation after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for stones smaller than 20 mm

The incidence of stonestreet formation after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) rises with increasing stone burden. However, stonestreet after ESWL is often experienced even in stones smaller than 20 mm. To examine whether the non-contrast helical computed tomography (CT) data could predict stonestreet formation in these stones, 53 radiopaque stones of 5-20 mm treated with ESWL were evaluated. Maximal dimension was measured on plain radiograph. From an attenuation value histogram graphed from the CT data, total stone volume and mean attenuation value were calculated. Seven stonestreets longer than 25 mm developed. There was no significant difference in maximal dimension and total stone volume between stones that did and stones that did not develop stonestreet. Mean attenuation value was the sole significant predictive factor. Application of mean attenuation value with cut-off level of 650 HU would anticipate stonestreet formation with a sensitivity of 85.7% and a specificity of 71.7%. The estimated risk of stonestreet formation is high in the treatment of stones with higher mean attenuation value.     

经皮肾穿气压弹道碎石联合体外冲击波碎石治疗上尿路结石

目的 探讨提高上尿路结石碎石成功率的微创治疗方法。方法 采用经皮肾穿微造瘘输尿管镜气压弹道碎石，术中放置双J管，术后配合体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)治疗上尿路结石48例。结果 结石总排净率为89．1％，结石最小排净率79．2％，无严重并发症发生。结论 该方法结石排净率高，创伤较小，手术并发症少，是上尿路结石较为理想的微创治疗方法。     

ELECTROHYDRAULIC LITHOTRIPSY: AN EFFECTIVE AND ECONOMICAL MODALITY OF ENDOSCOPIC URETERIC LITHOTRIPSY

Background : Electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) has been available for endoscopic treatment of urinary calculi since 1960, but the large probe size and concerns regarding safety had previously restricted its use to the treatment of bladder calculi. However, recent refinements have made it particularly suitable for the treatment of ureteric calculi. Methods : The authors report their initial experience using EHL in conjunction with mini-ureteroscopy in the treatment of 94 ureteric calculi in 89 patients. The size of the calculi ranged from 3 to 19 mm in diameter, with a mean of 8.2 mm. The mean operating time was 29 min, ranging from 10 to 120 min. Results : A complete fragmentation rate of 91.5% of the calculi was achieved. There were no major complications and a low incidence of minor complications: haematuria (2.2%), urinary tract infection (3.4%) and postoperative ureteric colic (2.2%). There were four cases of minor ureteric perforations (4.5%); all were successfully treated using conservative measures. Conclusions : It is concluded that EHL is a safe and effective method of treating ureteric calculi.     

NE系列两种常用冲击波源碎石机治疗输尿管结石的疗效分析

目的分析并比较NE系列的两种冲击波源碎石机治疗输尿管结石的疗效、碎石时的疼痛程度、碎石时间及副作用。方法回顾性分析应用NE-IV型液电冲击波源碎石机治疗输尿管结石患者1290例及应用NE-VB型电磁冲击波源碎石机治疗输尿管结石患者1196例的临床资料,并进行疗效、碎石时间、碎石时的疼痛程度及副作用的比较。结果应用电磁冲击波源碎石机治疗输尿管上段结石患者的总有效率为85.4%,治疗时间23~60min,平均(35.3±5.7)min;输尿管下段结石患者的总有效率为94.6%,治疗时间3~60min,平均(30.5±6.1)min。碎石时患者的疼痛感觉轻。液电冲击波源碎石机治疗的输尿管上段结石患者的总有效率为75.7%,治疗时间25~110min,平均(38.0±9.8)min;输尿管下段结石为85.7%,治疗时间4~90min,平均(35.8±7.7)min。碎石时患者的疼痛感觉明显。此外,肾绞痛、血尿、恶心、呕吐、皮肤瘀斑等副作用明显高于电磁冲击波源碎石机治疗组。结论电磁冲击波源碎石机治疗输尿管结石疗效优于液电冲击波源碎石机,而且更安全、有效、痛苦小。     

复式脉冲低能量ESWL治疗肾结石769例报告

目的探讨复式脉冲HB-V型低能量体外冲击波碎石机治疗肾结石的治疗效果.方法采用复式脉冲HB-ESWL-VG型低能量碎石机治疗直径<2.0 cm的各类肾结石769例，治疗工作电压3～9 kV，平均冲击次数2 300次.结果肾盏结石总粉碎率为97.4%，其中上中盏结石复打率为13.1%，术后3个月排净率为89.4%，下盏结石复打率为17.3%，排净率为81.5%；肾盂结石粉碎率为98.3%，复打率为6.1%，术后3个月排净率为93.0%.结论复式脉冲低能量ESWL治疗肾结石具有治疗成功率高、复打率低、无严重并发症、副作用少之优点.     

Intraductal shock-wave lithotripsy in complicated common bile duct stones

Summary Intracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy was performed in 36 patients with problematic common bile duct stones. All of the patients had undergone unsuccessful mechanical lithotripsy prior to this procedure. In 29 patients (80.6%), the stones were fragmented under cholangioscopic control and subsequently extracted with a Dormia basket. In seven patients, the procedure failed due to stone impaction or failure to intubate the common bile duct with a nasobiliary tube. No complications were observed. Cholangioscopically guided intracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy is a highly effective and safe procedure for the conservative treatment of complicated common bile duct stones.Abbreviations ESWL extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy - ISWL intracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy Dedicated to Prof. Dr. med. Ludwig Demling on the occasion of his 70th birthday     

Why laparoscopic cholecystectomy today?

Traditional open cholecystectomy became the gold standard of surgical treatment for symptomatic gallstone disease during the last century. In spite of its good results, clinicians have been trying to establish effective nonsurgical methods of eliminating gallstones. Although oral, percutaneous, or retrograde litholysis can be used effectively for cholesterol stones, these represent only 10% of all gallstones. Moreover, intracorporeal lithotripsy is an invasive method, and while extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy is a promising procedure, even after careful selection, only 70%–80% of the patients become stone-free within 1 year. In fact, none of the methods which leave the gallbladder intact are free of complications, and they are followed by 50% stone recurrence within 5 years. Since 1987, laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become the procedure of choice as it is safe and only minimally invasive. We believe that the laparoscopic technique is a promising way to the surgery of the future.     

Nephrolithiasis associated with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease: contemporary urological management

PURPOSE: We evaluate the role of contemporary urological intervention in patients with nephrolithiasis associated with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Intervention for upper tract stones associated with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease was performed in 5 women and 2 men 29 to 65 years old (mean age 47). Indications for intervention consisted of flank pain in 6 patients and/or hematuria in 2. A total of 12 procedures (mean 1.7 per patient) were performed, including shock wave lithotripsy in 6 patients, percutaneous nephrolithotomy in 2, retrograde endoscopy or manipulation in 3 and extended pyelonephrolithotomy in 1. RESULTS: All patients were rendered stone-free or had only residual "dust." Hospital stay for 5 patients was 1 night or less and there were no complications. Renal function for each patient was stable or improved as measured by serum creatinine. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease who require intervention for nephrolithiasis can be safely and effectively treated with essentially any or all contemporary, minimally invasive techniques. The choice of intervention can be based primarily on size and location of the upper tract stones rather than the associated presence of polycystic kidneys.     

Variation in clinical outcome following shock wave lithotripsy

PURPOSE: We measure and compare operator specific success rates of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) performed by 12 urologists in 1 unit to determine interoperator variation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 1, 1994 to September 1, 1997 a total of 5,769 renal and ureteral stones received 9,607 ESWL treatments by 15 urologists with a Dornier MFL 5000 lithotriptor. The 3-month followup data are available for 4,409 stones. Outcome measures consisted of patient demographics, stone characteristics, technical details of lithotripsy, and stone-free and success rates by treating urologists. RESULTS: Treatment results were analyzed for 12 urologists (surgeons A to L) who treated more than 100 stones each, totaling 4,244 with followup information available. Mean stone-free and success rates were 50.6% and 72.3%, respectively. Surgeon A had significantly higher stone-free and success rates of 56.2% and 76.7%, respectively (p<0.05), with treatment results from 877 stones, which was a significantly higher number than others (p<0.05). Significant differences existed in mean number of shocks delivered among urologists (p = 0.0001), with surgeons A and J delivering the highest mean numbers (2,317 and 2,801, respectively). There was no difference in treatment duration (p = 0.75) but variation existed among urologists in terms of mean maximum treatment voltage (p = 0.0001). Mean fluoroscopy time at 4.1 minutes was higher for surgeon A than others (p<0.05). Mean complication rate following ESWL was 4.9% with no difference among urologists (p = 0.175). Re-treatment was required in 21.7% of cases and surgeon A had the lowest rate (15.9%, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated clinically and statistically significant intra-institutional differences in success rates following ESWL. The best results were obtained by the urologist who treated the greatest number of patients, used a high number of shocks and had the longest fluoroscopy time. Accurate targeting is crucial when using a lithotriptor, such as the Dornier MFL 5000, with a narrow focal zone of 6.5 mm. in diameter. Other centers should be encouraged to develop similar programs of outcome analysis in an attempt to improve performance.