期刊文献+

钬激光碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗输尿管结石疗效比较 被引量:40

Comparative Study Between Ureteroscopy with Holmium:YAG Laser Lithotripsy and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Treatment of Ureteral Calculi
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的比较输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术(URSHL)与体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)治疗输尿管结石的临床疗效。方法将156例输尿管结石患者根据治疗方式不同分为ESWL组和URSHL组,各78例,分别行ESWL和URSHL治疗。对比两组手术时间、手术并发症发生情况和术后3个月结石排净率。结果 URSHL组结石直径≤1.0cm和>1.0cm患者手术时间分别为(27.6±3.6)min和(35.2±6.4)min,低于ESWL组的(41.8±5.7)min和(50.4±9.1)min,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。术后3个月结石排净率比较,URSHL组总有效率为89.74%(70/78),高于ESWL组的76.92%(60/78),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。URSHL组结石直径≤1.0cm及>1.0cm患者中下段结石排净率分别为95.45%(21/22)和92.31%(24/26),高于ESWL组的66.67%(14/21)和74.07%(20/27),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论URSHL与ESWL均能有效治疗输尿管结石,对于位于中下段的结石,URSHL治疗效果优于ESWL。 Objective To make a comparative study between the clinical efficacy of ureteroscopy with holmium YAG laser lithotripsy(URSHL)and that of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy(ESWL)in treatment of ureteral calculi.Methods A total of 156 patients with ureteral calculi were randomly divided into ESWL group(n=78)and URSHL group(n=78).The two groups received ESWL and URSHL treatment respectively and were compared in regard to the operation time,the incidence rate of complications and the stone-free rate three months after the treatment.Results The operation time of the patients with calculi no more than 1.0cm and over 1.0cm in diameter in the URSHL group is(27.6±3.6)minutes and(35.2±6.4)minutes respectively,while that in the ESWL group is(41.8±5.7)minutes and(50.4±9.1)minutes,which means that there is a significant difference in the operation time between the two groups(P0.01).There is also a significant difference in the overall stone-free rate between the URSHL group(89.74%)and in the ESWL group(76.92%)(P0.05).Among the patients with calculi no more than 1.0cm and over 1.0cm in diameter,the stone-free rates of middle and lower urinary tract were95.45% and 92.31%respectively in the URSHL group and 66.67% and 74.07%respectively in the ESWL group,which suggests a significant difference(P〈0.05).There was no significant difference in incidence of complications between the two groups(P〈0.05).Conclusion Both URSHL and ESWL are effective in the treatment of ureteral calculi,but URSHL is more effective in treating the patients with ureteral calculi located in the middle and lower urinary tract.
出处 《成都医学院学报》 CAS 2016年第2期217-219,223,共4页 Journal of Chengdu Medical College
基金 中国高校医学期刊临床专项资金(No:11524337)
关键词 输尿管结石 钬激光碎石术 体外冲击碎石 输尿管镜 Ureteral calculus Holmium YAG laser Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy Ureteroscopy
  • 相关文献

参考文献14

二级参考文献49

共引文献135

同被引文献291

引证文献40

二级引证文献220

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部