摘要
目的比较急诊输尿管镜钬激光碎石(URS)与急诊体外冲击波碎石(ESWL)两种方法治疗输尿管下段结石引起的急性肾绞痛的效果。方法选取启东市第三人民医院2015年12月~2017年12月收治的110例输尿管下段结石合并急性肾绞痛患者作为研究对象,按照治疗方法的不同分为URS组(51例)与ESWL组(59例)。URS组采用URS的方法,ESWL组采用ESWL的方法。比较两组的视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分、清石率、效率商(EQ)和并发症。结果两组治疗前后的VAS评分比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。当结石<10mm时,URS组的手术时间、结石清除时间短于ESWL组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);当10mm≤结石≤15mm时,URS组的结石清除时间也短于ESWL组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。两组的一次性清石率、辅治率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组的EQ分别为70.4,48.6。结论急诊URS和急诊ESWL均是输尿管下段结石并急性肾绞痛安全、有效的治疗方法,而对于直径≥10mm的结石而言,URS疗效优于ESWL。
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of ureteroscopic (URS) holmium laser lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the treatment of distal ureteral stones with acute renal colic.Methods From December 2015 to December 2017,a total of 110 patients with acute renal colic due to distal ureteral stones were enrolled in the Third People′s Hospital of Qidong City.The patients were divided into the URS group (51 cases) and the ESWL group (59 cases) according to different treatment methods.The URS group used URS holmium laser lithotripsy,and the ESWL group used ESWL.Visual analogue scale (VAS),stone clearance rate,efficiency quotient (EQ) and complications were compared between the two groups.Results There was significant difference in the VAS scores in the two groups between before and after treatment (P<0.05).When the stone was less than 10 mm,the operation time and stone clearance time in the URS group were shorter than those in the ESWL group,and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).The stone clearance time in the URS group was shorter than that in the ESWL group when the stone size was less than 10 mm or less than 15 mm,the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).There was no significant difference in disposable stone clearance rate and adjuvant treatment rate between the two groups (P>0.05).EQ of the two groups were 70.4 and 48.6 respectively.Conclusion Both URS and ESWL are safe and effective in the treatment of distal ureteral stones with renal colic.However when the stones were >10 mm,the clinical efficacy of URL is better than ESWL.
作者
叶松云
YE Song-yun(Department of Urology,the Third People′s Hospital of Qidong City in Jiangsu Province,Qidong 226200,China)
出处
《中国当代医药》
2019年第22期73-76,共4页
China Modern Medicine
关键词
输尿管下段结石
急性肾绞痛
输尿管镜
体外冲击波碎石
Distal ureteral stone
Acute renal colic
Ureteroscope
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy
