Assimos D G, Wrenn J J, Harrison L H, McCullough D L, Boyce W H, Taylor C L, Zagoria R J, Dyer R B
Department of Urology, Bowman Gray School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
J Urol. 1991 Apr;145(4):710-4. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)38431-8.
A retrospective study was conducted comparing anatrophic nephrolithotomy (10 cases), percutaneous nephrolithotomy alone (4 cases) or percutaneous nephrolithotomy combined with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (23 cases) for the treatment of large staghorn calculi. A comparison based on collecting system anatomy demonstrated that anatrophic nephrolithotomy resulted in a greater stone-free rate, shorter hospitalization and lower costs while complication rates were similar. Anatrophic nephrolithotomy should still be considered a viable treatment option, especially for patients with large branched calculi in complex collecting systems.
进行了一项回顾性研究,比较了无萎缩性肾切开取石术(10例)、单纯经皮肾镜取石术(4例)或经皮肾镜取石术联合体外冲击波碎石术(23例)治疗巨大鹿角形结石的效果。基于集合系统解剖结构的比较表明,无萎缩性肾切开取石术的结石清除率更高、住院时间更短且成本更低,而并发症发生率相似。无萎缩性肾切开取石术仍应被视为一种可行的治疗选择,特别是对于复杂集合系统中存在大分支结石的患者。