中国社区医师
中國社區醫師
중국사구의사
Chinese Community Doctors
2014年
30期
85-86
,共2页
侬智虎%姚孝奎%乐立虎
儂智虎%姚孝奎%樂立虎
농지호%요효규%악립호
经皮肾镜碎石取石术%输尿管软镜钬激光碎石取石术%肾结石%临床疗效
經皮腎鏡碎石取石術%輸尿管軟鏡鈥激光碎石取石術%腎結石%臨床療效
경피신경쇄석취석술%수뇨관연경화격광쇄석취석술%신결석%림상료효
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy%Flexible ureteroscope holmium laser lithotripsy%Renal calculi%Clinical effect
目的：探究和分析经皮肾镜碎石取石术(PCNL)与输尿管软镜钬激光碎石取石术(F-URS)治疗肾结石的临床疗效。方法：2011年1月-2014年1月收治肾结石患者98例，作为研究对象，随机分为 PCNL 组和 F-URS 组。其中PCNL组采用经皮肾镜碎石取石术治疗，F-URS组采用输尿管软镜钬激光碎石取石术治疗。对比两组患者的治疗效果。结果：PCNL 组和 F-URS 组一期清石率分别为87.76%(43/49)和59.18%(29/49)。F-URS 组的二期清石率83.33%(15/18)，总清石率89.80%(44/49)。PCNL 组的一期清石率和 F-URS 组的总清石率差异不显著，无统计学意义(P＞0.05)。PCNL组的手术时间明显短于F-URS组一期手术，差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05)，但F-URS组一期和二期手术的住院时间均短于PCNL组，差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05)。结论：经皮肾镜碎石取石术仍是肾结石治疗的首选方式，但经皮肾镜碎石取石术(PCNL)与输尿管软镜钬激光碎石取石术(F-URS)各有优势，应根据患者的实际情况选择合适的手术方式。
目的：探究和分析經皮腎鏡碎石取石術(PCNL)與輸尿管軟鏡鈥激光碎石取石術(F-URS)治療腎結石的臨床療效。方法：2011年1月-2014年1月收治腎結石患者98例，作為研究對象，隨機分為 PCNL 組和 F-URS 組。其中PCNL組採用經皮腎鏡碎石取石術治療，F-URS組採用輸尿管軟鏡鈥激光碎石取石術治療。對比兩組患者的治療效果。結果：PCNL 組和 F-URS 組一期清石率分彆為87.76%(43/49)和59.18%(29/49)。F-URS 組的二期清石率83.33%(15/18)，總清石率89.80%(44/49)。PCNL 組的一期清石率和 F-URS 組的總清石率差異不顯著，無統計學意義(P＞0.05)。PCNL組的手術時間明顯短于F-URS組一期手術，差異有統計學意義(P＜0.05)，但F-URS組一期和二期手術的住院時間均短于PCNL組，差異有統計學意義(P＜0.05)。結論：經皮腎鏡碎石取石術仍是腎結石治療的首選方式，但經皮腎鏡碎石取石術(PCNL)與輸尿管軟鏡鈥激光碎石取石術(F-URS)各有優勢，應根據患者的實際情況選擇閤適的手術方式。
목적：탐구화분석경피신경쇄석취석술(PCNL)여수뇨관연경화격광쇄석취석술(F-URS)치료신결석적림상료효。방법：2011년1월-2014년1월수치신결석환자98례，작위연구대상，수궤분위 PCNL 조화 F-URS 조。기중PCNL조채용경피신경쇄석취석술치료，F-URS조채용수뇨관연경화격광쇄석취석술치료。대비량조환자적치료효과。결과：PCNL 조화 F-URS 조일기청석솔분별위87.76%(43/49)화59.18%(29/49)。F-URS 조적이기청석솔83.33%(15/18)，총청석솔89.80%(44/49)。PCNL 조적일기청석솔화 F-URS 조적총청석솔차이불현저，무통계학의의(P＞0.05)。PCNL조적수술시간명현단우F-URS조일기수술，차이유통계학의의(P＜0.05)，단F-URS조일기화이기수술적주원시간균단우PCNL조，차이유통계학의의(P＜0.05)。결론：경피신경쇄석취석술잉시신결석치료적수선방식，단경피신경쇄석취석술(PCNL)여수뇨관연경화격광쇄석취석술(F-URS)각유우세，응근거환자적실제정황선택합괄적수술방식。
Objective:To explore and analyze the clinical effect of percutaneous nephrolithotomy(PCNL) and flexible ureteroscope holmium laser lithotripsy(F-URS) in the treatment of renal calculi.Methods:98 patients with renal calculi were selected from January 2011 to January 2014.They were as the research objects.They were randomly divided into PCNL group and F-URS group. PCNL group was treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy.F-URS group was treated with flexible ureteroscope holmium laser lithotripsy.The treatment effects of two groups were compared.Results:The first phase stone clearance rates of PCNL group and F-URS group were respectively 87.76%(43/49) and 59.18%(29/49).The second phase stone clearance rate of F-URS group was 83.33%(15/18);the total stone clearance rate was 89.80%(44/49).The first phase stone clearance rate of PCNL group and the total stone clearance rate of F-URS group had no significant difference with no statistical significance(P>0.05).The operation time of PCNL group was significantly shorter than that of the first phase operation of F-URS group;the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).But the hospital stays of the first phase operation and the second phase operation in F-URS group were shorter than those of PCNL group;the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Conclusion:The percutaneous nephrolithotomy is the first choice for the treatment of renal calculi,but percutaneous nephrolithotomy and flexible ureteroscope holmium laser lithotripsy have advantages each.Appropriate surgical approach should be selected according to the actual situation of patients.
