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。

A comparative study of holmium laser lithotripsy and frequency-doubled double-pulse laser for ureteral stones

Objective:To compare the efficacy and safety of holmium laser lithotripsy(HoL) and ureteroscope frequency-doubled double-pulse laser(U100L).Methods:101 patients underwent ureteroscope lithotripsy either with Ho:YAG laser lithotripter(46 cases) or with the frequency-doubled double-pulse laser lithotripter(55 cases) for the treatment of ureteral stones.Results:Uhe single session overall successful rate of stone fragmentation of HoL was 91.3 and U100L was 87.3(P> 0.05 );The average lithotripsy time was shorter for HoL (28.9 min vs 37.9 min, P< 0.01 ); The average stone-free time was shorter for HoL ( 16.5 days vs 26.3 days,P< 0.01 ). 2 perforations were encountered in HoL whereas no perforation in U100L.Conclusions:HoL and U100L are all effective treatment modality for ureteral stones. HoL has its advantage over U100L in the average lithotripsy time and the average stone-free time,Whereas, U100L has its advantage in the safety.