期刊文献+

负压组合镜治疗肾结石的临床观察 被引量:17

Clinical observation on kidney stones treated by negative pressure combined with ureteroscopy
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的评价负压组合镜治疗肾结石的临床疗效及安全性。方法采用负压组合镜治疗482例肾结石患者,其中单发肾结石327例,多发肾结石155例,73例合并输尿管上段结石;结石最大径(18.03±8.27)mm。对手术过程及结石清除率(SFR)、并发症等进行评价。结果444例一期顺利进镜完成手术,38例患者因输尿管狭窄留置D-J管1个月后顺利行手术。手术时间(35.7±14.1)分钟,术后住院(1.8±0.8)天。术后第1天SFR为87.6%(422/482),术后1个月SFR为96.1%(463/482)。术后发热4.8%(23/482),输尿管穿孔0.2%(1/482),石街形成0.4%(2/482),无严重脓毒血症、肾周血肿发生。结论负压组合镜治疗肾结石安全、有效。 Objective To evaluate the efficiency and safety of negative pressure combined with ureteroscopy(NPCU) in the treatment of kidney stones. Methods The data of 482 patients who under- went NPCU for the treatment of kidney stones were collected. There were 327 cases of single kidney stone, 155 cases of multiple kidney stones and 73 cases complicated with upper ureteric stones in these cases. The larges stone diameter were ( 18.03 ± 8.27 ) mm. The operation process and stone clearance rate (SFR) ,complications were observed. Results 444 operations were completed successfully at one time. 38 ureteral stricture cases completed the operations successfully one month later after retained the D-J tube. The operation duration was( 35.7 ± 14.1 ) min, hospitalization days after operation were ( 1.8 ± 0.8 ) days. The SFR in the first day after operation was 87.6% (422/482)and 96.1% (463/482) after one month. Fever rate after operation was 4.8% (23/482), ureteral perforation rate was 0.2% ( 1/482), stone street formation rate was O. 4% (2/482). No severe spesis and perirenal hematoma happened. Conclusion NPCU is a safe and effective treatment for kidney stones.
作者 甘澍 周均洪 廖芝健 王树声 唐炎权 古炽明 翁湘涛 何君伟 GAN Shu ZHOU Junhong LIAO Zhijian et al(Department of Urology, Guangdong Provincial TCM hospi- tal, Guangzhou 510120, China)
出处 《临床外科杂志》 2017年第2期104-106,共3页 Journal of Clinical Surgery
关键词 负压组合镜 肾结石 结石清除率 并发症 negative pressure combined with ureteroscopy kidney calculi stone free rate complications
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

二级参考文献76

  • 1高小峰,李凌,彭泳涵,周铁,孙颖浩.输尿管软镜联合钬激光治疗2~4 cm肾结石疗效分析[J].微创泌尿外科杂志,2013,2(1):47-49. 被引量:63
  • 2李新德,陈岳兵,许力为,吴海洋,余大敏,芮雪芳,张大宏,李恭会,丁国庆,马亮.影响体外冲击波碎石术疗效的因素分析[J].中华泌尿外科杂志,2005,26(5):321-323. 被引量:53
  • 3梅骅,陈凌武,高新主编.泌尿外科手术学[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2008.50-52.
  • 4BASIRI A, SIMFOROOSH N, ZIAEE S, et al. Retrograde, ante- grade, and laparoscopic approaches for the management of large, proximal ureteral stones: a randomized clinical trial [ J ]. J Endourol, 2008, 22(12) : 2677 -2680.
  • 5JUAN Y S, SHEN J T, LI C C. Comparison of percutaneous neph- rolithotomy and ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the management of im- pacted, large, proximal ureteral stones[ J]. Kaohsiung J Med Sci, 2008, 24 (4) : 204 - 209.
  • 6SUN X, XIA S, LU J, et al. Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: randomized comparison of percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy [ J ]. J Endourol, 2008, 22(5) : 913 -917.
  • 7JUAN Y S, SHEN J T, LI C C, et al. Comparison of perctaneous nepphrelithotomy and ureteroscopic lithotripsy in eht management of impacted, jarge, proximal ureteral stone[ J]. Kaohsiung J Med Sci, 2008, 24 (4) : 204 - 208.
  • 8GOEL R, ARON M, KESARWANI P K, et al. Percutaneous an- tegrade removal of impacted upper - ureteral calculi : still the treat- ment of choice in developing countries[ J]. J Endourol, 2005, 19 (1) : 54 -57.
  • 9HEMAL A K, GOEL A, GOEL R. Minimally invasive etroperitone- oseopie ureterolithotomy[J]. J Urol, 2003, 169(2) : 480 -482.
  • 10LOPES NETO A C, KORKES F, SILVA J L, et al. Prospective randomized study of treatment of large proximal ureteral stones : ex- tracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus ureterolithotripsy versus laparoseopy[ J]. J Urol, 2012, 187( 1 ) : 164 - 168.

共引文献213

同被引文献136

引证文献17

二级引证文献171

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