输尿管镜钬激光碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗输尿管结石的临床对比分析

目的 评估在输尿管结石的医疗工作中分别运用输尿管镜钬激光碎石、体外冲击波碎石两种手术的效果情况.方法 以2015年5月至2016年5月因患输尿管结石而进入本院施行手术治疗的.患者107例为调研对象,依据评估需求、自愿原则,将其划分成观察组、参照组,观察组55例以体外冲击波碎石手术展开治疗,参照组52例以输尿管镜钬激光碎石手术展开治疗,评比两种手术法的运用成效情况.结果 观察组手术时间长于参照组,但术后排石时间短于参照组,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结石直径＜ 1cm的观察组排净率超出参照组(92.00％比65.3％);结石直径≥1 cm的观察组排净率低于参照组(60.00％比86.21％),差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 钬激光碎石手术、体外冲击波碎石手术运用在输尿管结石医疗处理中,具备各自的优势以及缺点,需依据结石大小实施适宜的手术方式.

Clinical comparative analysis of ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral calculi

Objective To evaluate the effect of ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral calculi.Methods A total of 107 patients with ureteral calculi from May 2015 to May 2016 were enrolled in this study,and divided into observation group and reference group according to the assessment of need and voluntary principle.Fifty-five patients in observation group underwent extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy,while fifty-two patients in reference group underwent ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy.The results of the two methods were compared.Results The operation time of the observation group was longer than that of the reference group,but the time of postoperative removing urinary calculus was shorter than that of the reference group (P＜0.05).The emptying rate of patients whose stone diameter ＜1 cm in observation group was higher than that in reference group (92.00％ vs.65.3％),the emptying rate of patients whose stone diameter＞1 cm in observation group was lower than that in reference group (60.00％ vs.86.21％),with statistically significant differences (P＜0.05).Conclusion Ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral calculi have their own advantages and shortcomings.They should be carried out according to the size of stones.