[1]王　磊,马　玲,乔庆东,等.输尿管软镜碎石术和体外冲击波碎石术治疗小于20 mm肾结石的临床疗效及影响因素分析[J].新乡医学院学报,2019,36(12):1141-1144.[doi:10.7683/xxyxyxb.2019.12.009]
　WANG Lei,MA Ling,QIAO Qing-dong,et al.Clinical effect and influencing factors of the flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for diameter 20 mm renal calculi[J].Journal of Xinxiang Medical University,2019,36(12):1141-1144.[doi:10.7683/xxyxyxb.2019.12.009]
点击复制

输尿管软镜碎石术和体外冲击波碎石术治疗小于20 mm肾结石的临床疗效及影响因素分析
分享到：

《新乡医学院学报》[ISSN:1004-7239/CN:41-1186/R]

卷:
36
期数:
2019年12
页码:
1141-1144
栏目:
临床研究
出版日期:
2019-12-12

文章信息/Info

Title:
Clinical effect and influencing factors of the flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for diameter <20 mm renal calculi
作者:
王　磊1; 马　玲2; 乔庆东1; 李龚龙1; 冀　阳2; 刘振锋1
(1.新乡市中心医院泌尿外一科，河南　新乡　453000；2.新乡市中心医院泌尿外二科，河南　新乡　453000)
Author(s):
WANG Lei1; MA Ling2; QIAO Qing-dong1; LI Gong-long1; JI Yang2; LIU Zhen-feng1
（1.Department of the First Urologic Surgery，the Central Hospital of Xinxiang City，Xinxiang 453000，Henan Province，China；2.Department of the Second Urologic Surgery，the Central Hospital of Xinxiang City，Xinxiang 453000，Henan Province，China）
关键词:
体外冲击波碎石; 输尿管软镜碎石术; 肾结石
Keywords:
extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy; flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy; kidney calculi
分类号:
R691.4
DOI:
10.7683/xxyxyxb.2019.12.009
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的　评估输尿管软镜碎石术（FURS）和体外冲击波碎石术（ESWL）治疗直径<20 mm 肾结石的效果，并分析影响治疗效果的因素。方法　回顾性分析2014年10月至2019年7月新乡市中心医院收治的264例直径<20 mm 肾结石患者的临床资料，按治疗方式分为FURS组（n=112）和ESWL组（n=152），2组患者再按照结石直径分为<10 mm组、10～15 mm组和15～20 mm组。FURS组患者给予FURS进行治疗，ESWL组患者给予ESWL进行治疗。比较2组患者治疗后结石清除率、重复治疗率及并发症发生率，采用logistic回归分析影响结石清除率的因素。结果　FURS组患者治疗后结石清除率高于ESWL组，重复治疗率低于FURS组（P<0.05）；2组患者并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。亚组分析结果显示，结石直径<10 mm组中FURS组和ESWL组患者结石清除率、重复治疗率、并发症发生率比较差异均无统计学意义（P>0.05）。10～15 mm组中FURS组患者结石清除率高于ESWL组，重复治疗率低于FURS组（P<0.05）。FURS组和ESWL组患者并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。15～20 mm组中FURS组患者结石清除率高于ESWL组，重复治疗率低于FURS组（P<0.05）；FURS组和ESWL组患者并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。Logistic回归分析结果显示，肾下盏结石是影响FURS术后结石清除率的因素（P<0.05），结石直径是影响ESWL术后结石清除率的因素（P<0.05）。结论　FURS和ESWL均为治疗直径<20 mm肾结石的有效方法，对于直径<10 mm结石，2种术式者疗效相似；结石直径10～20 mm时，FURS治疗效果优于ESWL；结石直径及位置情况是影响结石清除率的因素。
Abstract:
Objective　To evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of the flexible ureterscopic lithotripsy (FURS) and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy(ESWL) in treatment of diameter<20 mm renal calculi and analyse the factors influencing the treatment effect.Methods　The clinical data of 264 patients with diameter<20 mm renal calculi in the Xinxiang Central Hospital from October 2014 to July 2019 were collected and analyzed retrospectively.The patients were divided into FURS group(n=112) and ESWL group(n=152) according to the treatment method.According to the stone diameter，the patients in the FURS group and ESWL group were divided into <10 mm group，10-15 mm group and 15-20 mm group.The stone clearance rate，repeated treatment rate and complication rate were compared between the two groups，and the influencing factors of stone clearance rate were analyzed by logistic regression.Results　Compared with ESWL group,the stone clearance rate of patients in FURS group was higher and the repeated treatment rate was lower after treatment (P<0.05); there was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups(P<0.05).The results of subgroup analysis showed that there was no significant difference in stone clearance rate，repeated treatment rate and complication rate between FURS group and ESWL group in diameter<10 mm patients(P>0.05).In 10-15 mm group and 15-20 mm group，the stone clearance rate of patients in FURS group was higher than that in ESWL group and the repeated treatment rate was lower than that in the ESWL group (P<0.05);there was no significant difference in complication rate between FURS group and ESWL group.Logistic regression analysis showed that lower calyceal calculi was the influencing factors of stone clearance rate after FURS(P<0.05)，and the stone diameter was the influencing factor of stone clearance rate after ESWL(P<0.05).Conclusion　Both FURS and ESWL are effective treatment method for the diameter<20 mm renal calculi.FURS and ESWL have similar therapeutic efficacy in treatment of diameter<10 mm renal calculi;however，the effect of FURS is better than ESWL when the stone diameter increase to 10-20 mm.The diameter and location of stone are the influencing factors of stone clearance rate.

参考文献/References:

［1］　WEN C C，NAKADA S Y.Treatment selection and outcomes:renal calculi［J］.Urol Clin North Am,2007,34(3):409-419．
［2］　SCHMIDT S,MIERNIK A.Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones［J］.Urologe A,2015,54 (9): 1283-1286．
［3］　陈文忠,钟文,曾国华,等.输尿管软镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管上段结石［J］.中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志：电子版,2012,6(4):278-280．DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3253.2012.04.009.
［4］　彭泳涵,施晓磊,高小峰,等.输尿管软镜处理经皮肾镜取石术后残留肾结石［J］.第二军医大学学报,2014,35(2):225-227．
［5］　张泽，李逊，夏明义，等．复式脉冲低能量体外冲击碎石治疗上尿路结石（附717例报告）［J］．中华泌尿外科杂志，2004，25（7）：448-449．
［6］　孙晓文，夏术阶，鲁军，等．体外冲击波碎石、逆行输尿管镜或微创经皮输尿管镜碎石治疗上端输尿管结石的比较［J］．中华泌尿外科杂志，2008，29（8）：553-556．
［7］　TURK C，PETRIK A，SARICA K，et al.EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolothiasis［J］.Euro Urol，2016，69(3): 475-482.
［8］　ZHANG W，ZHOU T，WU T，et al.Retrograde intrarenal sugery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for treatment of lower pole renal stones:ameta analysis and systematic review［J］.J Endourol，2015，29(7): 745-759.
［9］　朱峰，范毛川，陈帅奇，等．输尿管软镜与微创经皮肾镜碎石术治疗直径≤2cm肾结石的对比分析［J］．新乡医学院学报，2016，33（6）：533-535．
［10］　HUSASAIN M，ACHER P，PENEV B，et al.Redefning the limits of fexible ureterorenoscopy［J］.J Endourol，2011，25（1）: 45-49．
［11］　葛广成，崔飞伦，李中兴，等．体外冲击波碎石和输尿管软镜在治疗2 cm以下肾下盏结石的前瞻性随机对照研究［J］．现代泌尿外科杂志，2016，21（7）：533-536．
［12］　BREDA A，ANGERRI O.Retrograde intrarenal sugery for kidney stones larger than 2.5 cm［J］.Curr Opin Urol，2014，24(2): 179-183.
［13］　EL-NAHAS A R，IBRAHIM H M，YOUSSEF R F.Fexible ureterorenoscopy versus extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for treatment of lower pole stones of 10-20 mm ［J］.BJU Int，2012，110（2）: 898-902.
［14］　邱学德，李泽惠，李志鹏，等．微通道经皮肾镜手术并发症的治疗体会［J］．现代泌尿外科杂志，2009，14（2）：91-93．
［15］　高让，廖邦华，陈云天，等．输尿管软镜钬激光碎石取石术治疗大于2 cm上尿路结石的疗效及安全性分析［J］．重庆医科大学学报，2018，43（4）：527-531．
［16］　周琦,周福祥.输尿管结石大小、位置、成分、嵌入黏膜情况及肾积水程度对输尿管镜钬激光碎石术疗效的影响［J］.中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志：电子版，2007,1(2):122.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-3253.2007.02.026.
［17］　RESORLU B，UNSAL A，GULEC H，et al.A new scoring system for predicting stone-free rate after retrograde intrarenal surgery:the “resorlu-unsal stone score”［J］.Urology,2011，80(3):512-518.
［18］　中华医学会泌尿外科分会,中国泌尿系结石联盟.软性输尿管镜术中国专家共识［J］．中华泌尿外科杂志，2016，37（8）：561-565．

相似文献/References:

[1]朱　峰,陈帅奇,侯国栋,等.Ⅰ期肾穿刺造瘘后Ⅱ期经皮肾镜碎石术联合输尿管软镜碎石术治疗复杂性肾结石疗效观察[J].新乡医学院学报,2019,36(8):777.[doi:10.7683/xxyxyxb.2019.08.018]
　ZHU Feng,CHEN Shuai-qi,HOU Guo-dong,et al.Efficacy of percutaneous nephrostomy in stage Ⅰ and flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy combined with percutaneous nephrolithotomy in stage Ⅱ for the treatment of complex renal calculus[J].Journal of Xinxiang Medical University,2019,36(12):777.[doi:10.7683/xxyxyxb.2019.08.018]
[2]周真文,毕满华,蒋　方,等.经皮肾镜碎石术与经尿道输尿管软镜碎石术治疗肾结石疗效比较[J].新乡医学院学报,2021,38(3):289.[doi:10.7683/xxyxyxb.2021.03.018]
　ZHOU Zhenwen,BI Manhua,JIANG Fang,et al.Comparison of the effect between percutaneous nephrolithotomy and transurethral flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the treatment of renal calculus[J].Journal of Xinxiang Medical University,2021,38(12):289.[doi:10.7683/xxyxyxb.2021.03.018]
[3]李龚龙,乔庆东,王华礼,等.输尿管软镜碎石术与经皮肾镜碎石术治疗鹿角形肾结石疗效比较[J].新乡医学院学报,2016,33(8):692.[doi:10.7683/xxyxyxb.2016.08.011]
　LI Gong-long,QIAO Qing-dong,WANG Hua-li,et al.Comparison of the efficacy of flexible ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in treatment of renal staghorn calculi[J].Journal of Xinxiang Medical University,2016,33(12):692.[doi:10.7683/xxyxyxb.2016.08.011]

更新日期/Last Update: 2019-12-05