• 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

经皮肾镜碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗中等大小肾结石。

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for moderate sized kidney stones.

机构信息

Charleston Area Medical Center, Charleston, WV, USA.

出版信息

Urology. 2011 Oct;78(4):739-43. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.04.010. Epub 2011 Jun 12.

DOI:10.1016/j.urology.2011.04.010
PMID:21664653
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for moderate sized (1-2 cm) upper and middle pole renal calculi in regards to stone clearance rate, morbidity, and quality of life.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed with moderate sized upper and middle pole kidney stones by computed tomography (CT) were offered enrollment. They were randomized to receive either ESWL or PNL. The SF-8 quality of life survey was administered preoperatively and at 1 week and 3 months postoperatively. Abdominal radiograph at 1 week and CT scan at 3 months were used to determine stone-free status. All complications and outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

PNL established a stone-free status of 95% and 85% at 1 week and 3 months, respectively, whereas ESWL established a stone-free status of 17% and 33% at 1 week and 3 months, respectively. Retreatment in ESWL was required in 67% of cases, with 0% retreatment in PNL. Stone location, stone density, and skin-to-stone distance had no impact on stone-free rates at both visits, irrespective of procedure. Patient-reported outcomes, including overall physical and mental health status, favored a better quality of life for patients who had PNL performed.

CONCLUSION

PNL more often establishes stone-free status, has a more similar complication profile, and has similar reported quality of life at 3 months when compared with ESWL for moderate-sized kidney stones. PNL should be offered as a treatment option to all patients with moderate-sized kidney stones in centers with experienced endourologists.

摘要

目的

比较经皮肾镜碎石术(PNL)和体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)治疗 1-2cm 中上盏肾结石的结石清除率、发病率和生活质量。

方法

所有经 CT 诊断为中上盏肾结石的患者均被纳入研究。他们被随机分为 ESWL 组或 PNL 组。术前、术后 1 周和 3 个月时进行 SF-8 生活质量调查。术后 1 周行腹部平片、3 个月行 CT 扫描以确定结石清除情况。记录所有并发症和结局。

结果

PNL 在术后 1 周和 3 个月时结石清除率分别为 95%和 85%,而 ESWL 在术后 1 周和 3 个月时结石清除率分别为 17%和 33%。ESWL 中有 67%的患者需要再次治疗,而 PNL 组中无一例需要再次治疗。结石位置、结石密度和皮肤-结石距离在两次就诊时均不影响结石清除率,与手术方式无关。患者报告的结局,包括总体身体和心理健康状况,表明 PNL 治疗的患者生活质量更好。

结论

与 ESWL 相比,PNL 更常达到结石清除状态,并发症谱更相似,且在 3 个月时报告的生活质量相似。对于有经验的腔内泌尿外科医生所在的中心的所有中等大小肾结石患者,均应将 PNL 作为一种治疗选择。

相似文献

1
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for moderate sized kidney stones.经皮肾镜碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗中等大小肾结石。
Urology. 2011 Oct;78(4):739-43. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2011.04.010. Epub 2011 Jun 12.
2
Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of lower pole stones of 10-20 mm.输尿管软镜与体外冲击波碎石术治疗 10-20mm 下极结石的比较。
BJU Int. 2012 Sep;110(6):898-902. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.10961.x. Epub 2012 Feb 28.
3
Does previous extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy affect the performance and outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy?既往体外冲击波碎石术是否会影响经皮肾镜取石术的操作及结果?
J Urol. 2009 Feb;181(2):663-7. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.10.016. Epub 2008 Dec 16.
4
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy with ultrasonography-guided renal access: experience from over 300 cases.超声引导下经皮肾穿刺取石术:300余例经验
BJU Int. 2005 Oct;96(6):875-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05749.x.
5
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.
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
[Treatment of staghorn calculi: combined therapy and stone recurrence].鹿角形结石的治疗:联合治疗与结石复发
Hinyokika Kiyo. 1993 Nov;39(11):1097-101.
8
[Solitary stones of the lower renal calyx: how to treat?].[肾下盏孤立结石:如何治疗?]
Urologiia. 2017 Jun(2):28-35. doi: 10.18565/urol.2017.2.28-35.
9
Factors affecting stone-free rate and complications of percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of staghorn stone.影响经皮肾镜取石术治疗鹿角形结石结石清除率和并发症的因素。
Urology. 2012 Jun;79(6):1236-41. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2012.01.026. Epub 2012 Apr 1.
10
[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.

引用本文的文献

1
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones.体外冲击波碎石术 (ESWL) 与经皮肾镜碎石取石术 (PCNL) 或逆行肾内手术 (RIRS) 治疗肾结石的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Aug 1;8(8):CD007044. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007044.pub4.
2
Second-look flexible ureteroscopy after RIRS - Holmium Moses TFL (Soltive).RIRS 后二次柔性输尿管镜检查 - 钬摩西 TFL(Soltive)
J Med Life. 2022 Oct;15(10):1218-1223. doi: 10.25122/jml-2022-0180.
3
Antioxidant and Anti-Urolithiatic Activity of Aqueous and Ethanolic Extracts from (Falc) Lispich Using Scanning Electron Microscopy.
使用扫描电子显微镜对镰叶鼠麴草水提取物和乙醇提取物的抗氧化及抗尿路结石活性研究
Life (Basel). 2022 Jul 11;12(7):1026. doi: 10.3390/life12071026.
4
Medical evaluation and pharmacotherapeutical strategies in management of urolithiasis.尿石症管理中的医学评估与药物治疗策略
Ther Adv Urol. 2021 Feb 24;13:1756287221993300. doi: 10.1177/1756287221993300. eCollection 2021 Jan-Dec.
5
The effectiveness and safety of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the management of kidney stones: A protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis.体外冲击波碎石术治疗肾结石的有效性和安全性:一项系统评价与荟萃分析方案
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 May;99(19):e19915. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000019915.
6
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus shock wave lithotripsy for high-density moderate-sized renal stones: A prospective randomized study.经皮肾镜取石术与冲击波碎石术治疗高密度中等大小肾结石的前瞻性随机研究
Urol Ann. 2019 Oct-Dec;11(4):426-431. doi: 10.4103/UA.UA_63_19.
7
Management of upper ureteral stones exceeding 15 mm in diameter: Shock wave lithotripsy versus semirigid ureteroscopy with holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser lithotripsy.直径超过15毫米的上段输尿管结石的治疗:冲击波碎石术与钬:钇铝石榴石激光碎石术联合半硬性输尿管镜检查的比较
SAGE Open Med. 2016 Dec 20;4:2050312116685180. doi: 10.1177/2050312116685180. eCollection 2016.
8
Uncovering the real outcomes of active renal stone treatment by utilizing non-contrast computer tomography: a systematic review of the current literature.利用非增强计算机断层扫描揭示活动性肾结石治疗的真实结果:对当前文献的系统评价
World J Urol. 2017 Jun;35(6):897-905. doi: 10.1007/s00345-016-1943-y. Epub 2016 Oct 13.
9
Day care PNL using 'Santosh-PGI hemostatic seal' versus standard PNL: A randomized controlled study.使用“Santosh-PGI止血密封剂”的日间经皮肾镜取石术与标准经皮肾镜取石术的随机对照研究。
Cent European J Urol. 2016;69(2):190-7. doi: 10.5173/ceju.2016.792. Epub 2016 Jun 20.
10
Does morbid obesity influence the success and complication rates of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for upper ureteral stones?病态肥胖是否会影响输尿管上段结石体外冲击波碎石术的成功率及并发症发生率?
Turk J Urol. 2015 Mar;41(1):20-3. doi: 10.5152/tud.2015.94824.