浙江创伤外科
浙江創傷外科
절강창상외과
ZHEJIANG JOURNAL OF TRAUMATIC SURGERY
2015年
1期
13-15,18
,共4页
输尿管镜碎石术%经皮肾镜取石%输尿管上段结石%临床疗效
輸尿管鏡碎石術%經皮腎鏡取石%輸尿管上段結石%臨床療效
수뇨관경쇄석술%경피신경취석%수뇨관상단결석%림상료효
Ureteroscopy lithotripsy%Percutaneous nephroscope lithotomy%Ureteral Duan Jieshi%Clinical curative effect
目的：探讨输尿管镜碎石术与经皮肾镜取石治疗输尿管上段结石临床疗效，寻找临床最佳术式。方法选取本院收治的输尿管上段结石患者78例，随机分为两组，其中对照组39例，予输尿管镜碎石术治疗；实验组39例，予经皮肾镜取石治疗。治疗结束后，对比治疗前后患者手术时间、住院时间、失血量以及结石清除率、并发症的发生率。结果①实验组与对照组患者手术时间、住院时间以及失血量相仿，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；②治疗后，实验组（97.4%）结石清除率显著高于对照组（79.5%），差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；③治疗后，两组患者均出现部分并发症，且实验组（10.3%）并发症的总发生率显著低于对照组（20.5%），差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。结论输尿管镜碎石术与经皮肾镜取石治疗对输尿管上段结石患者均有一定的治疗效果，且手术时间、住院时间、手术中患者出血量等情况基本相同，但经皮肾经取石治疗效果突出，结石清除率显著提高、术后并发症的发生率明显降低，是治疗输尿管上段结石的高效治疗方法，值得临床广泛应用。
目的：探討輸尿管鏡碎石術與經皮腎鏡取石治療輸尿管上段結石臨床療效，尋找臨床最佳術式。方法選取本院收治的輸尿管上段結石患者78例，隨機分為兩組，其中對照組39例，予輸尿管鏡碎石術治療；實驗組39例，予經皮腎鏡取石治療。治療結束後，對比治療前後患者手術時間、住院時間、失血量以及結石清除率、併髮癥的髮生率。結果①實驗組與對照組患者手術時間、住院時間以及失血量相倣，差異無統計學意義（P＞0.05）；②治療後，實驗組（97.4%）結石清除率顯著高于對照組（79.5%），差異有統計學意義（P＜0.05）；③治療後，兩組患者均齣現部分併髮癥，且實驗組（10.3%）併髮癥的總髮生率顯著低于對照組（20.5%），差異有統計學意義（P＜0.05）。結論輸尿管鏡碎石術與經皮腎鏡取石治療對輸尿管上段結石患者均有一定的治療效果，且手術時間、住院時間、手術中患者齣血量等情況基本相同，但經皮腎經取石治療效果突齣，結石清除率顯著提高、術後併髮癥的髮生率明顯降低，是治療輸尿管上段結石的高效治療方法，值得臨床廣汎應用。
목적：탐토수뇨관경쇄석술여경피신경취석치료수뇨관상단결석림상료효，심조림상최가술식。방법선취본원수치적수뇨관상단결석환자78례，수궤분위량조，기중대조조39례，여수뇨관경쇄석술치료；실험조39례，여경피신경취석치료。치료결속후，대비치료전후환자수술시간、주원시간、실혈량이급결석청제솔、병발증적발생솔。결과①실험조여대조조환자수술시간、주원시간이급실혈량상방，차이무통계학의의（P＞0.05）；②치료후，실험조（97.4%）결석청제솔현저고우대조조（79.5%），차이유통계학의의（P＜0.05）；③치료후，량조환자균출현부분병발증，차실험조（10.3%）병발증적총발생솔현저저우대조조（20.5%），차이유통계학의의（P＜0.05）。결론수뇨관경쇄석술여경피신경취석치료대수뇨관상단결석환자균유일정적치료효과，차수술시간、주원시간、수술중환자출혈량등정황기본상동，단경피신경취석치료효과돌출，결석청제솔현저제고、술후병발증적발생솔명현강저，시치료수뇨관상단결석적고효치료방법，치득림상엄범응용。
Objective To investigate clinical efficacy of the ureteroscopy lithotripsy and percutaneous nephroscope for treatment of ureteral stone. Methods 78 cases with ureteral stone were randomly divided into two groups, 39 cases as control group were treated with ureteroscopy lithotripsy. 39 cases as experimental group were treated with percutaneous nephroscope. The operation time, hospitalization time, blood loss and stone clearance rate and the incidence of complication were recorded. Results The operation time, hospitalization time and blood loss had no statistically significant difference in the 2 groups (P>0.05). Stone clearance rate in the experimental group (97.4%) was significantly higher than that in the control group (79.5%)(P<0.05). The total complication rate in the experimental group (10.3%) was significantly lower than that in the control group (20.5%) (P<0.05). Conclusions Compared with Ureteroscopy lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy also had a certain therapeutic effect, had the same of operation time, length of hospital stay and blood loss. but also had higher stone clearance rate, less postoperative complications.
