• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[鹿角形结石的治疗。71例报告]

[Treatment of stafhorn calculi. Report of 71 cases].

作者信息

Tazi K, Karmouni T, Janane A, el Fassi M J, Koutani A, Ibn Attya A, Hachimi M, Lakrissa A

机构信息

Service d'urologie B, hôpital Ibn-Sina, Rabat, Maroc.

出版信息

Ann Urol (Paris). 2000 Dec;34(6):365-9.

PMID:11147077
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We retrospectively investigated 63 patients suffering from 71 staghorn calculi, who were treated with primary surgical monotherapy, in order to determine long-term. results and the fate of the residual stones.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Mean follow-up was 2.6 years. There were 63 patients (32 men, 31 women). The treatment was pyelolithotomy alone in 26 cases; nephrolithotomy alone in 14 cases; pyelolithotomy associated with nephrolithotomy in 18 cases; percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in two cases; extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) in one case; and nephrectomy in ten cases.

RESULTS

At the conclusion of therapy the stone-free rate was 94.1%. The complication was septic complications in 12 patients, hemorrhage that needed transfusion in five case and fistula in one case. After four and six years, two patients developed renal insufficiency and two patients had a recurrence of stones.

CONCLUSION

Primary surgery of complex staghorn calculi is justified because of its better results than PCNL associated with ESMIL.

摘要

目的

我们回顾性研究了63例患有71枚鹿角形结石的患者,这些患者接受了一期手术单一疗法治疗,以确定长期结果及残余结石的转归。

材料与方法

平均随访时间为2.6年。患者共63例(男性32例,女性31例)。治疗方法为:单纯肾盂切开取石术26例;单纯肾切开取石术14例;肾盂切开取石术联合肾切开取石术18例;经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)2例;体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)1例;肾切除术10例。

结果

治疗结束时结石清除率为94.1%。并发症包括12例患者发生感染性并发症,5例患者出血需要输血,1例患者发生瘘管。4年和6年后,2例患者出现肾功能不全,2例患者结石复发。

结论

复杂性鹿角形结石的一期手术是合理的,因为其效果优于PCNL联合ESWL。

相似文献

1
[Treatment of stafhorn calculi. Report of 71 cases].[鹿角形结石的治疗。71例报告]
Ann Urol (Paris). 2000 Dec;34(6):365-9.
2
Long-term follow-up after primary extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy monotherapy of staghorn calculi: results after more than 6 years.鹿角形结石初次体外冲击波碎石术单一疗法后的长期随访:6年以上的结果
Acta Urol Belg. 1997 Oct;65(3):41-5.
3
Management of calyceal diverticular stones with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy: long-term outcome.体外冲击波碎石术和经皮肾镜取石术治疗肾盏憩室结石:长期疗效
BJU Int. 2007 Jul;100(1):151-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.06911.x.
4
[Open surgery of calculus of the kidney pelvis. Results and complications in the era of extracorporeal lithotripsy].[肾盂结石开放手术。体外冲击波碎石时代的结果与并发症]
Ann Urol (Paris). 1995;29(6-7):378-81.
5
[Recurrence of lithiasis after extracorporeal lithotripsy, percutaneous surgery, and open surgery for calculi of the upper urinary tract].[体外冲击波碎石术、经皮手术及开放手术后上尿路结石复发情况]
Prog Urol. 1992 Jun;2(3):396-401.
6
Treatment of renal stones in children: a comparison between percutaneous nephrolithotomy and shock wave lithotripsy.儿童肾结石的治疗:经皮肾镜取石术与冲击波碎石术的比较
J Urol. 2006 Aug;176(2):706-10. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.03.080.
7
Multimodal management of urolithiasis in renal transplantation.肾移植中尿石症的多模式管理
BJU Int. 2005 Aug;96(3):385-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05636.x.
8
[The staghorn calculus: anatrophic nephrolithotomy versus percutaneous litholapxy and extracorporeal shockwave therapy versus extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy monotherapy. A report of over 6 years' experience].[鹿角形结石:无萎缩性肾切开取石术与经皮肾镜碎石术以及体外冲击波治疗与体外冲击波碎石术单一疗法。超过6年经验的报告]
Urologe A. 1989 May;28(3):152-7.
9
[Results of the treatment of renal lithiasis by percutaneous nephrolithotomy: apropos of 115 cases].经皮肾镜取石术治疗肾结石的结果:附115例报告
Prog Urol. 1999 Feb;9(1):52-60.
10
Long-term outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy compared to shock wave lithotripsy and conservative management.经皮肾镜取石术与冲击波碎石术及保守治疗相比的长期疗效。
J Urol. 2008 Jun;179(6):2233-7. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.01.115. Epub 2008 Apr 18.