期刊文献+

输尿管软镜碎石术与经皮肾镜取石术治疗直径2~4 cm肾结石的临床疗效对比 被引量:7

Clinical efficacy of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy vs.percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of renal calculi with a diameter of 2-4 cm
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的探讨输尿管软镜碎石术(RIRS)与经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)治疗2~4 cm肾结石的安全性和有效性。方法分析2019年1月至2021年12月广东医科大学附属医院收治的165例2~4 cm肾结石患者临床资料,根据选择的术式分为RIRS组(n=100)和PCNL组(n=65),观察两组患者的临床疗效,组间采用独立样本t检验、秩和检验、χ^(2)检验或Fisher精确率检验。结果所有患者手术均顺利完成。RIRS组与PCNL组清石率比较[87.70%(78/100)和78.00%(57/65)],差异无统计学意义(χ^(2)=2.488,P>0.05);RIRS组与PCNL组手术时间分别为90(65,100)min和50(30,60)min;差异有统计学意义(Z=-7.129,P<0.05);术后血红蛋白(Hb)下降值分别为4.00(-1.00,9.00)g/L和9.00(4.00,6.00)g/L,差异有统计学意义(Z=-3.821,P<0.05);术后住院时间分别为2(2,3)d和4(4,5)d,差异有统计学意义(Z=-8.811,P<0.05)。术后并发症两组比较,RIRS组与PCNL组术后感染率比较[17.00%(17/100)比12.30%(8/65)],差异无统计学意义(χ^(2)=0.675,P>0.05);脓毒血症发生率比较[3.00%(3/100)比0.00%(0/65)],差异无统计学意义(χ^(2)=0.661,P>0.05),术后出血率比较[0.00%(0/100)比6.15%(4/65)],差异有统计学意义(χ^(2)=3.973,P<0.05)。结论治疗2.0~4.0 cm肾结石,RIRS与PCNL均为安全有效的方法,两者清石率相当,与PCNL比较,RIRS具有创伤小、出血更少、恢复快和住院时间短等优势。 Objective To explore the safety and effectiveness of ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy(RIRS)and percutaneous nephrolithotomy(PCNL)for treating 2-4 cm renal stones.Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on clinical data from 165 patients with 2-4 cm renal stones admitted to Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University between January 2019 and December 2021.The patients were divided into RIRS group(n=100)and PCNL group(n=65)according to the selected surgery.The clinical efficacy of the two groups was observed.The independent-samples Test,Rank sum test,Chi-Square Test or Fisher’s exact test was used to compare the differences in two groups.Results All patients successfully completed the operation.There was no statistically significant difference in stone clearance rate between RIRS group and PCNL group[78.00%(78/100)vs.87.70%(57/65),χ^(2)=2.488,P>0.05].The operation time was 90(65,100)min and 50(30,60)min in RIRS group and PCNL group,respectively,and the difference was statistically significant(Z=-7.129,P<0.05).The hemoglobin(Hb)level was decreased by 4.00(-1.00,9.00)g/L and 9.00(4.00,6.00)g/L postoperatively in RIRS group and PCNL group,respectively,and the difference was statistically significant(Z=-3.821,P<0.05).The postoperative hospital stay was 2(2,3)d and 4(4,5)d in RIRS group and PCNL group,respectively,and the difference was statistically significant(Z=-8.811,P<0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative infection rate between RIRS group and PCNL group[17.00%(17/100)vs.12.30%(8/65),χ^(2)=0.675,P>0.05],septicemia rate[3.00%(3/100)vs.0.00%(0/65),χ^(2)=0.661,P>0.05),but the difference in postoperative bleeding rate was statistically significant between two groups[0.00%(0/100)vs.6.15%(4/65),χ^(2)=3.973,P<0.05].Conclusion For the treatment of 2.0-4.0 cm renal stones,both RIRS and PCNL are safe and effective.The stone clearance rate is equivalent.RIRS has the advantages of less trauma,less bleeding,faster recovery and shorter hospital stay than PCNL.
作者 李思宁 朱砂 苏劲 肖展聪 黄健 颜赟坤 陈锦延 Li Sining;Zhu Sha;Su Jin;Xiao Zhancong;Huang Jian;Yan Yunkun;Chen Jinyan(Department of Urology,Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University,Zhanjiang 524001,China)
出处 《中华实验外科杂志》 CAS 北大核心 2023年第4期750-754,共5页 Chinese Journal of Experimental Surgery
基金 广东医科大学科研基金自然科学类面上培育项目(GDMUM2020040)。
关键词 输尿管软镜碎石术 经皮肾镜取石术 肾结石 临床疗效 Ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy Percutaneous nephrolithotomy Renal stones Clinical efficacy
  • 相关文献

参考文献5

二级参考文献53

  • 1李柏均,宁金卓,林方优,程帆,余伟民,饶婷.基于肾脏血管解剖建立经皮肾通道的实验研究[J].武汉大学学报(医学版),2020,41(6):911-916. 被引量:3
  • 2Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, et al. Surgical management of stones: american urological association/endourological society guideline, PART II[ J ]. J Urol, 2016, pii: S0022-5347 (16) 30532-8 [ 2016-07-18 ]. http://www, jurology, com/article/ S0022-5347( 16 )30532-8/fulhext.
  • 3Giusti G, Proietti S, Villa L, et al. Current standard technique for modern flexible ureteroscopy : tips and tricks [ J ]. Eur Urol,2016, 70:188-194.
  • 4Bansal P, Bansal N, Sehgal A, et al. Bilateral single-session retrograde intra-renal surgery: a safe option for renal stones up to 1.5 cm[J]. Urol Ann,2016,8:56-59.
  • 5Yamany T, van Batavia J, Ahn J, et al. Ureterorenoscopy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: how often are we missing lesions.9 [J]. Urology,2015, 85: 311-315.
  • 6Yakoubi R, Colin P, Seisen T, et al. Radical nephroureterectomy versus endoscopic procedures for the treatment of localised upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a meta-analysis and a systematic review of current evidence from comparative studies [ J ]. Eur J Surg 0ncol,2014,40: 1629-1634.
  • 7Yu W, Zhang D, He X, et al. Flexible ureteroscopic management of symptomatic renal cystic diseases [ J ]. J Surg Res, 2015,196: 118-123.
  • 8Kachrilas S, Bourdoumis A, Karaolides T, et al. Current status of minimally invasive endoscopic management of ureteric strictures [J ]. Ther Adv Urol, 2013, 5: 354-365.
  • 9Fan S, Gong B, Hao Z, et al. Risk factors of infectious complications following flexible ureteroscope with a holmium laser: a retrospective study[J]. Int J Clin Exp Med, 2015, 8 : 11252- 11259.
  • 10Zhong W, Leto G, Wang L, et al. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome after flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a study of risk factors[ J ]. J Endourol, 2015,29 : 25-28.

共引文献230

同被引文献76

二级引证文献3

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