欢迎访问《现代生物医学进展》编辑部！

目的：比较微通道经皮肾镜取石术和标准通道经皮肾镜取石术的临床效果。方法：选取2010 年1 月至2014 年5 月我院收治的118 例肾结石患者，根据治疗方案分为微通道经皮肾镜取石术（MPCNL）（M 组，62 例）和标准通道经皮肾镜取石术（SPCNL）（S组，56 例），比较两组术中术后相关指标和并发症情况。结果：与S 组相比，M组的手术时间更长，冲水量更多，但手术中出血量更少，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）；M 组术后血肌酐(Scr)、住院时间、卧床时间以及术后费用均小于或短于S 组，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）；两组结石清除率没有显著差异（P>0.05）；两组术后发热、出血、介入栓塞、结合穿孔、脓毒血症等并发症比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论：行MPCNL患者相比行SPCNL患者术后效果更好，临床上可根据结石的大小选择手术类型。

英文摘要:

Objective:To compare the clinical effect of microchannel percutaneous nephrolithotomy（MPCNL）with standard tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy（SPCNL）.Methods:A total of 118 patients with kidney stone, who were treated in Caofeidian District Hospital from January 2010 to May 2014, were divided into MPCNL group (Group M , n=62 ) and SPCNL group (Group S, n=56 ) according to the treatment plan. The intraoperative and postoperative related indexes and complications were compared between the two groups.Results:Compared with Group S, operation time of Group M was longer, flushing water was more, but amount of bleeding during operation was less,with statistical significance (P<0.05); The postoperative Scr, hospitalization time, bed time, postoperative costs of GroupMwere less or shorter than these of Group S, with statistical significance (P<0.05); There was no significant difference in the stone clearance rate between the two groups (P>0.05); There was no significant difference in complications of two groups such as fever, bleeding, interventional embolization, combined with perforation, sepsis between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusion:For kidney stone patients, MPCNL is superior to SPCN. So best operation types can be chosen according to the sizes of the stones.

View Full Text View/Add Comment Download reader