世界最新医学信息文摘（连续型电子期刊）
世界最新醫學信息文摘（連續型電子期刊）
세계최신의학신식문적（련속형전자기간）
World Latest Medicine Information
2015年
73期
36-37,43
,共3页
体外冲击波碎石术%体位%输尿管下段结石
體外遲擊波碎石術%體位%輸尿管下段結石
체외충격파쇄석술%체위%수뇨관하단결석
extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy%position%Lower ureteral calculi
目的:比较体外冲击波碎石术(extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy,ESWL)仰卧位、俯卧位两种体位治疗输尿管下段结石的有效率、并发症率,寻找ESWL治疗输尿管下段结石的最佳体位.方法:收集2008年6月到2015年6月来我院治疗的直径8-15mm单发输尿管下段结石患者160例,用随机分为两组:仰卧位ESWL组、俯卧位ESWL组,每组80例.术后随访1月,统计分析上述患者的术后排石率、排净率、并发症率等,并分析比较这两种治疗方法的有效性、安全性.结果:两组患者结石大小、结石成分无统计学差异(P>0.05).排石率:仰卧位ESWL组、俯卧位ESWL组术后1周(78.8%、76.3%)、术后2周(88.7%、86.2%)和1月的排石率(93.8%、91.3%)差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);排净率:仰卧位ESWL组、俯卧位ESWL组术后1周(47.5%、43.8%)差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但术后2周(70.0%、52.5%)和术后1月(81.3%、66.3%)的排净率差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).俯卧位ESWL组并发症率高于仰卧位ESWL组,但差异无统计学意义.结论:ESWL两种治疗体位,仰卧位优于俯卧位,远期排石率、排净率均高于俯卧位,是一种较为有效安全的手术方法.
目的:比較體外遲擊波碎石術(extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy,ESWL)仰臥位、俯臥位兩種體位治療輸尿管下段結石的有效率、併髮癥率,尋找ESWL治療輸尿管下段結石的最佳體位.方法:收集2008年6月到2015年6月來我院治療的直徑8-15mm單髮輸尿管下段結石患者160例,用隨機分為兩組:仰臥位ESWL組、俯臥位ESWL組,每組80例.術後隨訪1月,統計分析上述患者的術後排石率、排淨率、併髮癥率等,併分析比較這兩種治療方法的有效性、安全性.結果:兩組患者結石大小、結石成分無統計學差異(P>0.05).排石率:仰臥位ESWL組、俯臥位ESWL組術後1週(78.8%、76.3%)、術後2週(88.7%、86.2%)和1月的排石率(93.8%、91.3%)差異無統計學意義(P>0.05);排淨率:仰臥位ESWL組、俯臥位ESWL組術後1週(47.5%、43.8%)差異無統計學意義(P>0.05),但術後2週(70.0%、52.5%)和術後1月(81.3%、66.3%)的排淨率差異有統計學意義(P<0.05).俯臥位ESWL組併髮癥率高于仰臥位ESWL組,但差異無統計學意義.結論:ESWL兩種治療體位,仰臥位優于俯臥位,遠期排石率、排淨率均高于俯臥位,是一種較為有效安全的手術方法.
목적:비교체외충격파쇄석술(extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy,ESWL)앙와위、부와위량충체위치료수뇨관하단결석적유효솔、병발증솔,심조ESWL치료수뇨관하단결석적최가체위.방법:수집2008년6월도2015년6월래아원치료적직경8-15mm단발수뇨관하단결석환자160례,용수궤분위량조:앙와위ESWL조、부와위ESWL조,매조80례.술후수방1월,통계분석상술환자적술후배석솔、배정솔、병발증솔등,병분석비교저량충치료방법적유효성、안전성.결과:량조환자결석대소、결석성분무통계학차이(P>0.05).배석솔:앙와위ESWL조、부와위ESWL조술후1주(78.8%、76.3%)、술후2주(88.7%、86.2%)화1월적배석솔(93.8%、91.3%)차이무통계학의의(P>0.05);배정솔:앙와위ESWL조、부와위ESWL조술후1주(47.5%、43.8%)차이무통계학의의(P>0.05),단술후2주(70.0%、52.5%)화술후1월(81.3%、66.3%)적배정솔차이유통계학의의(P<0.05).부와위ESWL조병발증솔고우앙와위ESWL조,단차이무통계학의의.결론:ESWL량충치료체위,앙와위우우부와위,원기배석솔、배정솔균고우부와위,시일충교위유효안전적수술방법.
Objective:By comparing the efficiencyand safety of Supine position extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL),Prone position extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral calculi, to determine which modality is more cost -effective.Methods:From July 2008 to July,2015,a prospective study was conducted to compare two modalities for the management of160 patients with lower ureteral calculi which were 8-15mm in diameter.Stone formers were random enrolled into three groups by random number table:the Supine position ESWL group,Prone position ESWL group ,every group has 80 cases.Count patients stones coposition,stone row rate,stone free rate,complication rate,to compare the efifciency and safety of two modalities.Results:No statistically significant difference was found in calculis'size,composition for two groups (P>0.05). The stone row rate of postoperative 1 week,2 weeks and 1month of the Supine ESWL group and the Prone ESWL group (78.8%,76.3%;88.7%,86.2% and 93.8%,91.3%) were no statistically significant(P>0.05); the stone free rate of postoperative 1 week of the Supine ESWL group and the Prone ESWL group (47.5%,43.8%) were no statistically significant(P>0.05),but the stone free rate of postoperative 2 weeks and 1 month of the Supine ESWL group and the Prone ESWL group (70.0%,52.5% and 81.3%,66.3%) were statistically significant(P<0.05).The complication rate of the Prone ESWL group was higher than the Supine ESWL group ,but the differences were no statistically significant(P>0.05).Conclusion:Supine ESWL was superior than the prone position, was cost-effective surgical method.
