切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2017, Vol. 11 ›› Issue (01) : 38 -41. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3253.2017.01.009

所属专题: 文献

临床研究

输尿管软镜与微通道经皮肾镜治疗肾结石(≤2 cm)的比较
冷松柏1, 钟毅2, 黄明2,()   
  1. 1. 341000 赣州,赣南医学院研究生院
    2. 341000 赣州,赣南医学院第三附属医院泌尿外科
  • 收稿日期:2016-04-06 出版日期:2017-02-01
  • 通信作者: 黄明
  • 基金资助:
    江西省赣南医学院研究生创新资金项目(YC2005-X008)

Comparison of flexible ureteroscope lithotripsy and microchannel percutaneous nephrolithotomy lithotripsy for treatment of kidney stones (≤2 cm)

Songbai Leng1, Yi Zhong2, Ming Huang2,()   

  1. 1. Graduate School of Gannan Medical University, Jiangxi 341000, China
    2. Department of Urology, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Gannan Medical University, Jiangxi 341000, China
  • Received:2016-04-06 Published:2017-02-01
  • Corresponding author: Ming Huang
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Huang Ming, Email:
引用本文:

冷松柏, 钟毅, 黄明. 输尿管软镜与微通道经皮肾镜治疗肾结石(≤2 cm)的比较[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2017, 11(01): 38-41.

Songbai Leng, Yi Zhong, Ming Huang. Comparison of flexible ureteroscope lithotripsy and microchannel percutaneous nephrolithotomy lithotripsy for treatment of kidney stones (≤2 cm)[J]. Chinese Journal of Endourology(Electronic Edition), 2017, 11(01): 38-41.

目的

通过输尿管软镜下钬激光碎石取石术及微通道经皮肾镜钬激光碎石取石术治疗肾结石(≤2 cm)对比研究,探讨输尿管软镜下取石术在中小体积肾结石微创治疗中的优势与价值。

方法

回顾性分析2014年1月至2015年12月在赣南医学院第三附属医院行肾结石(≤2 cm)手术治疗的283例患者病历资料,其中采用输尿管软镜下取石术治疗137例,采用微通道经皮肾镜碎石取石术治疗146例。比较两种碎石术的结石清除率、平均手术时间、术后下床活动时间、平均住院时间、术后血红蛋白下降水平以及术后各种并发症。

结果

输尿管软镜下取石术组术后下床活动时间、平均住院时间、术后血红蛋白下降水平及手术时间都明显低于微通道经皮肾镜取石术组(6.7±1.4)h vs(14.6±2.1)h,(49±5)h vs(120±19)h,(3.9±0.7)g/L vs (19.5±12.0)g/L,(36±14)h vs(54±17)h,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01);术后两者结石清除率分别为95.89%和94.89%(χ2=0.150,P=0.699),差异无统计意义(P=0.687);两者并发症发生率差异无统计意义(χ2=0.150,P>0.05)。

结论

运用输尿管软镜下取石术治疗肾结石(≤2 cm),具有手术所需时间短,创伤小,术中出血量少,术后恢复快等优点。

objective

To assess and compare the security, efficacy bewteen holmium laser lithotripsy of microchannel percutaneous nephro1ithotomy(MPCNL) and holmium laser lithotripsy of flexible ureteroscope (F-URL) for renal calculi (≤2 cm).

Methods

The 283 patients with kidney stones (≤2 cm) were analyzed in our hospital from January 2014 to December 2015. 137 patients were treated by F-URL, 146 patients were treated by MPCNL. The stone-free rate, average operation time, time for exercise after operation, average length of stay at hospital, postoperative haemoglobin levels and postoperative complications were evaluated.

Results

Average operation time, time for exercise after operation, average length of stay at hospital, postoperative haemoglobin levels of F-URL group were significantly lower than MPCNL group (6.7±1.4) h vs (14.6±2.1) h, (49±5) h vs (120±19) h, (3.9±0.7) g/L vs (19.5±12.0) g/L, (36±14) h vs (54±17) h, the differences were statistically significant (P<0.01). The differences of stone-free rate in the two groups were not statistically significant (95.89% vs 94.89%, χ2=0.150, P=0.699) , and the differences of postoperative complications rate in the two groups were not statistically significant (χ2=0.150, P=0.687).

Conclusion

The F-URL on kidney stones (≤2cm) can obtain satisfactory curative effect for patients with one renal calculus, which has less operation time, less trauma, less bleeding, less postoperative hospital stay.

表1 MPCNL与F-URL两组术前情况的比较(±s
表2 MPCNL和F-URL两组患者的围手术期及术后的数据比较
[1]
那彦群,叶章群,孙颖浩,等.中华泌尿外科疾病诊断治疗指南[M].北京:人民卫生出版社, 2014: 137.
[2]
Sener NC, Imamoglu MA, Bas O, et al. Prospective randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and flexible ureterorenoscopy for lower Pole stones smaller than 1 cm[J]. Urolithiasis, 2014, 42(2): 127-131.
[3]
El-Nahas AR, Ibrahim HM, Youssef RF, et al. Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of lower Pole stones of 10-20 mm[J]. BJU Int, 2012, 110(6): 898-902.
[4]
Akman T, Binbay M, Ozgor F, et al. Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde flexible nephrolithotripsy for the management of 2-4 cm stones: a matched-pair analysis[J]. BJU Int, 2012, 109(9): 1384-1389.
[5]
Zhang LJ, Ye XJ, Huang XB, et al. Comparison of tubeless-percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ureteroscopic lithotripsy in treatment of upper-ureteral calculi sized ≥1.5 cm[J]. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao, 2015, 47(1): 170-174.
[6]
Zhong W, Leto G, Wang L, et al. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome after flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a study of risk factors[J]. J Endourol, 2015, 29(1): 25-28.
[7]
Stuurman RE, Al-Qahtani SM, Cornu J. Antegrade percutaneous flexible endoscopic approach for the management of urinary Diversion-Associated complications[J]. J Endourol, 2013, 27(11): 1330-1334.
[8]
Doizi S, Letendre J, Bonneau C, et al. Comparative study of the treatment of renal stones with flexible ureterorenoscopy in normal weight, obese, and morbidly obese patients[J]. Urology, 2015, 85(1): 38-44.
[9]
Bozkurt OF, Tepeler A, Sninsky BA, et al. Flexible ureterorenoscopy for the treatment of kidney stone within pelvic ectopic kidney[J]. Urology, 2014, 84(6): 1285-1289.
[10]
Ishii H, Aboumarzouk OM, Somani BK. Current status of ureteroscopy for stone disease in pregnancy[J]. Urolithiasis, 2014, 42(1): 1-7.
[11]
Ishii H, Rai B, Traxer O, et al. Outcome of ureteroscopy for stone disease in patients with horseshoe kidney:Review of world literature[J]. Urol Ann, 2015, 7(4): 470-474.
[12]
Guo J, Yang WZ, Zhang Y, et al. Ultramini nephrostomy tract combined with flexible ureterorenoscopy for the treatment of multiple renal calculi in paediatric patients[J]. Korean J Urol, 2015, 56(7): 519-524.
[13]
Assimos DG. Re: management of calyceal diverticular calculi: a comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and flexible ureterorenoscopy[J]. J Urol, 2015, 193(4): 1275-1276.
[14]
Liu K, Xiao CL, Liu YQ, et al. Management of calyceal diverticular calculi with stenotic infundibulum by flexible ureteroscopic holmium laser infundibulectomy and lithotripsy[J]. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao, 2015, 47(4): 618-621.
[15]
Zhao Q, Huang S, Li Q, et al. Treatment of parapelvic cyst by internal drainage technology using ureteroscope and Holmium laser[J]. West Indian Med J, 2015, 64(3): 230-235.
[1] 郑鹏, 吴赛萍, 谢秀璋, 史庆丰. 术前预测感染性肾结石列线图模型的构建及验证[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 299-306.
[2] 方钟进, 黄华生, 陈早庆, 郁兆存, 郑哲明, 谢永康, 陈仲宁, 邹演辉, 刘乾海, 陈镇宏. 负压组合式输尿管镜联合输尿管软镜与经皮肾镜治疗复杂性肾结石的比较[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 601-604.
[3] 曹智, 朱希望, 王尉, 张辉, 杨成林, 张小明. 经皮肾镜碎石取石术中不同肾盂内压力与围术期并发症相关性研究[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 616-620.
[4] 方道成, 胡媛媛. 钙和维生素D与肾结石形成关系的研究进展[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 653-656.
[5] 陈美仁, 戴逸骅, 张茹, 戴英波. "蛙泳"俯卧位在经皮肾镜术中的应用[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 581-586.
[6] 龙卫兵, 刘晓冰, 易仁政, 邹德博, 蒋玉斌, 陈亮, 谢超群, 刘红叶, 粟周华, 张雄峰, 李麒麟. CT、B超预定位"三步法"经皮肾镜治疗上尿路结石[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 587-592.
[7] 张文涛, 陈俊明, 秦海生, 杨胜进, 余朝辉, 白冰, 王世洋, 段彩莲, 王震. 4.8 F可视肾镜在飞行人员肾脏小结石中的临床应用[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 593-596.
[8] 周川鹏, 杨浩, 魏微阳, 王奇, 黄亚强. 微创与标准通道经皮肾镜治疗肾结石合并肾功能不全的对比研究[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 470-475.
[9] 徐哲, 罗杰, 吴强, 李忠, 王晓伟, 郑硕, 郝晓东, 王照. 腹主动脉钙化患者肾结石成分特点及危险因素分析[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 481-485.
[10] 张磊, 米洋, 王昌喜, 李曜行, 王小东, 牛旭东, 王靖宇. 一次性输尿管软镜通路鞘两种置入深度的临床研究[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 486-489,494.
[11] 张星宇, 李炯明, 刘建和, 方克伟, 王光, 杨博伟. 无管化PCNL适应证选择及疗效观察[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 512-515.
[12] 熊风, 林辉煌, 陈晓波. 铥激光在泌尿外科中的临床应用及研究进展[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 533-536.
[13] 窦上文, 邓欢, 刘邦锋, 岳高远志, 朱华财, 刘永达. 术前复查尿培养在预测微通道经皮肾镜取石术相关感染并发症中的作用[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 361-366.
[14] 张曦才, 曹先德. 经皮肾镜取石术治疗无积水肾结石中皮肾通道建立的应用研究进展[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(08): 911-915.
[15] 张曦才, 曹先德, 高建萍, 沈大庆, 曹现祥, 郭诗杰, 李凤岳, 肖琳. 免人工肾积水在超声引导经皮肾镜取石术中的应用[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(07): 798-803.
阅读次数
全文


摘要