中国基层医药
中國基層醫藥
중국기층의약
CHINESE JOURNAL OF PRIMARY MEDICINE AND PHARMACY
2012年
17期
2577-2578
,共2页
输尿管结石%输尿管镜%体外%碎石
輸尿管結石%輸尿管鏡%體外%碎石
수뇨관결석%수뇨관경%체외%쇄석
Ureteral stones%Ureteroscopic%Extracorporeal%Lithotripsy
目的 比较输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术(URL)与体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)治疗输尿管结石的效果.方法 将90例输尿管结石患者随机分为A组(URL组)、B组(ESWL组)各45例,比较两组的手术治疗效果.结果 A组一次性碎石成功率、4周后结石排净率明显高于B组(x2=9.680、5.414,均P＜0.05),但两组手术时间及住院时间差异均无统计学意义(t=1.010、0.909,均P＞0.05).A组术后发生肾绞痛、发热等并发症明显低于B组(x2=6.049、5.075,均P＜0.05),但术后肉眼血尿及输尿管损伤明显多于B组(x2＝5,874、3.873,均P＜0.05).结论 输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗输尿管结石疗效均较好,但输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术的碎石成功率及结石排净率明显高于体外冲击波碎石术,且术后近期并发症少于体外冲击波碎石术.
目的 比較輸尿管鏡氣壓彈道碎石術(URL)與體外遲擊波碎石術(ESWL)治療輸尿管結石的效果.方法 將90例輸尿管結石患者隨機分為A組(URL組)、B組(ESWL組)各45例,比較兩組的手術治療效果.結果 A組一次性碎石成功率、4週後結石排淨率明顯高于B組(x2=9.680、5.414,均P＜0.05),但兩組手術時間及住院時間差異均無統計學意義(t=1.010、0.909,均P＞0.05).A組術後髮生腎絞痛、髮熱等併髮癥明顯低于B組(x2=6.049、5.075,均P＜0.05),但術後肉眼血尿及輸尿管損傷明顯多于B組(x2＝5,874、3.873,均P＜0.05).結論 輸尿管鏡氣壓彈道碎石術與體外遲擊波碎石術治療輸尿管結石療效均較好,但輸尿管鏡氣壓彈道碎石術的碎石成功率及結石排淨率明顯高于體外遲擊波碎石術,且術後近期併髮癥少于體外遲擊波碎石術.
목적 비교수뇨관경기압탄도쇄석술(URL)여체외충격파쇄석술(ESWL)치료수뇨관결석적효과.방법 장90례수뇨관결석환자수궤분위A조(URL조)、B조(ESWL조)각45례,비교량조적수술치료효과.결과 A조일차성쇄석성공솔、4주후결석배정솔명현고우B조(x2=9.680、5.414,균P＜0.05),단량조수술시간급주원시간차이균무통계학의의(t=1.010、0.909,균P＞0.05).A조술후발생신교통、발열등병발증명현저우B조(x2=6.049、5.075,균P＜0.05),단술후육안혈뇨급수뇨관손상명현다우B조(x2＝5,874、3.873,균P＜0.05).결론 수뇨관경기압탄도쇄석술여체외충격파쇄석술치료수뇨관결석료효균교호,단수뇨관경기압탄도쇄석술적쇄석성공솔급결석배정솔명현고우체외충격파쇄석술,차술후근기병발증소우체외충격파쇄석술.
Objective To compare the effect of ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy(URL) and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy(ESWL) for ureteral stones.Methods 90 patients with ureteral stones were randomly divided into group A( URL group),group B( ESWL group),each group 45 cases.The effect of surgical treatment was compared between the two groups.Results The one-time success rate of gravel,stone free after 4 weeks of A group was significantly higher than that of group B( x2 =9.680,5.414,all P ＜0.05),but there was no significant difference in the surgical time and hospital stay of the two groups( t =1.010,0.909,all P ＞ 0.05 ).The postoperative renal colic,fever and other complications of group A were significantly lower than that of group B ( x2 =6.049,5.075,all P ＜0.05),but the gross heraturia and ureteral injury of group A was higher than that of group B(x2 =5.874,3.873,all P ＜ 0.05 ).Conclusion The ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral stones all have good effect,but ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy and stone rubble drain success rate are significantly higher than extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy,and postoperative complications are relatively less than extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.
