文章摘要
赵恩阳,刘云力,叶长琦,李学东,吕丽飞,刘思阳.可视化多镜联合治疗复杂鹿角结石的对比研究[J].,2022,(6):1165-1168
可视化多镜联合治疗复杂鹿角结石的对比研究
Contrastive Study of Visual Treatment for Complex Staghorn Calculi with Multiple Combined Endoscopes
投稿时间:2021-05-29  修订日期:2021-06-25
DOI:10.13241/j.cnki.pmb.2022.06.035
中文关键词: 复杂肾结石  可视穿刺  针状肾镜  输尿管软镜
英文关键词: Complex renal calculi  Visual puncture  Needle-perc  F-URS
基金项目:黑龙江省卫生健康委科研项目(2020-067)
作者单位E-mail
赵恩阳 哈尔滨医科大学附属二院泌尿三科 黑龙江 哈尔滨 150086 lspzey@sina.com 
刘云力 哈尔滨医科大学附属二院泌尿三科 黑龙江 哈尔滨 150086  
叶长琦 中国人民解放军联勤保障部队第 962医院泌尿外科 黑龙江 哈尔滨 150086  
李学东 哈尔滨医科大学附属二院泌尿三科 黑龙江 哈尔滨 150086  
吕丽飞 中国人民解放军联勤保障部队第 962医院泌尿外科 黑龙江 哈尔滨 150086  
刘思阳 中国人民解放军联勤保障部队第 962医院泌尿外科 黑龙江 哈尔滨 150086  
摘要点击次数: 16
全文下载次数: 8
中文摘要:
      摘要 目的:研究不同组合方式治疗复杂鹿角样结石的疗效对比。方法:选取 80例我院治疗的复杂鹿角样结石患者,将患者随机分成两组,A组以经皮肾镜 +针状肾镜 (needle-perc) 的方式清理结石,B组以经皮肾镜 +输尿管软镜(flexibleureteroscope,F-URS)的方式清理结石,术后收集患者相关数据包括穿刺时间,单次穿刺成功率,单位结石量手术时间,清石效率,术中出血量,术后并发症,完全清石率等参数评估手术效果。结果:80例患者一期完成,主通道穿刺时间 A组(6± 1.62)min小于 B组(10±3.25)min(P<0.001)。单次穿刺成功率 A组(38/40)优于 B组(32/40)(P<0.05)。主通道清石时间 A组(40.94± 8.09)min和 B组(37.29± 4.19)min相比较无统计学意义(P>0.05)。残石处理时间 A组(34.37± 6.68)min小于 B组(49.55± 11.62)min(P<0.05),主通道结石清石效率 A组(0.27± 0.05)cm3/min和 B组(0.26± 0.06)cm3/min相比较无统计学意义(P>0.05),残石清石效率 A组(0.05± 0.01)cm3/min高于 B组(0.03± 0.01)cm3/min(P<0.05)。术后并发症及完全清石率两组无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:作为标准通道的辅助手段,needle-perc和输尿管软镜能很好的完成残石的处理,同超声定位穿刺相比较,可视穿刺花费时间更短,穿刺单次穿刺成功率更高,相对于软镜处理残石,needle-perc有更高的清石效率。两种方法的术中及术后并发症发生率,完全清石率无差别。
英文摘要:
      ABSTRACT Objective: To study the efficacy of different combination methods in the treatment of complex renal calculi. Methods: 80 cases of complex staghorn calculi patients were studied, patients were randomly divided into two groups, patients in group A were treated with PCNL and needle-perc method while group B with PCNL and F-URS, postoperative dates were collected including puncture time, single puncture success rate, operation time/stone volume, Stone removal efficiency, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, the length of hospital stay, rates of complete stone removal. Results: All operations were finished in one stage. The puncture time of the main channel of Group A(6± 1.62)min were less than Group B(10± 3.25)min(P<0.001). The success rates of single puncture of Group A(38/40)were better than those of Group B(32/40)(P<0.05). The time of removal stone through main channel were not statistically significant between Group A(40.94± 8.09)min and Group B(37.29± 4.19)min(P>0.05). The time of removal residual stones of Group A(34.37± 6.68)min were less than those of Group B(49.55± 11.62)min, the efficiency of removal stone through main channel were not statistically significant between Group A(0.27± 0.05)cm3/min and Group B(0.26± 0.06)cm3/min, the removal efficiency of residual stones in group A(0.05± 0.01)cm3/min were better than those in group B(0.03± 0.01)cm3/min(P<0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications and complete cleavage rate were not statistically significant in the two groups(P>0.05). Conclusion: As an auxiliary means of PCNL, needle-perc and F-URS are competent for treatment of residual stones. Compared with ultrasonic localization, visual puncture takes less time, the success rates of single puncture are higher. Compared with F-URS, needle-perc has a higher efficiency of residual stones removal.
查看全文   查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
关闭