Suppr超能文献

钬激光与气压弹道碎石术在内镜治疗输尿管结石中的疗效比较。

A comparison of efficacies of holmium YAG laser, and pneumatic lithotripsy in the endoscopic treatment of ureteral stones.

作者信息

Akdeniz Ekrem, İrkılata Lokman, Demirel Hüseyin Cihan, Saylık Acun, Bolat Mustafa Suat, Şahinkaya Necmettin, Zengin Mehmet, Atilla Mustafa Kemal

机构信息

Department of Urology, Samsun Training and Research Hospital, Samsun, Turkey.

出版信息

Turk J Urol. 2014 Sep;40(3):138-43. doi: 10.5152/tud.2014.46548.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the effectiveness of holmium YAG laser and pneumatic lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral stones.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 216 patients who had established indications of ureteroscopy between November 2011 and June 2012 were included in this study. Patients' files were retrospectively reviewed by dividing cases as groups that underwent pneumatic (PL) or laser lithotripsy (LL) procedures. Age, sex, stone burden and localization, duration of follow-up, operative times were evaluated. Stone-free rates were evaluated by ureteroscopical examination, postoperative scout films and ultrasonography.

RESULTS

Group PL consisted of 109 and group LL of 107 patients. Median age was 43.93±15.94 years in Group PL and 46.15±14.54 years in Group LL. Male to female ratio, stone burden and localization were similar for both groups. Overall success rate was 89.9% in Group PL and 87.9% in Group LL, respectively (p<0.791). With the aid of additional procedures, success rate was 100% for both groups at the end of the first month. Groups were not different as for operative time, rate of insertion of an ureteral catheter and its removal time. Hospitalization period was apparently somewhat shorter in Group LL (p=0.00).

CONCLUSION

Pneumatic lithotripsy can be as efficacious as laser lithotripsy and be used safely in the endoscopic management of ureteral stone. In comparison of both methods, we detected no differences as to operative time, success of operation and the time to removal of the catheter, however, hospitalization period was shorter in Group LL.

摘要

目的

我们旨在比较钬激光和气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效。

材料与方法

本研究纳入了2011年11月至2012年6月间有输尿管镜检查明确指征的216例患者。通过将病例分为接受气压弹道(PL)或激光碎石术(LL)的组,对患者病历进行回顾性分析。评估患者的年龄、性别、结石负荷和位置、随访时间、手术时间。通过输尿管镜检查、术后定位片和超声检查评估结石清除率。

结果

PL组109例患者,LL组107例患者。PL组中位年龄为43.93±15.94岁,LL组为46.15±14.54岁。两组的男女比例、结石负荷和位置相似。PL组总体成功率分别为89.9%,LL组为87.9%(p<0.791)。借助额外的操作,两组在第一个月末成功率均为100%。两组在手术时间、输尿管导管插入率及其拔除时间方面无差异。LL组住院时间明显较短(p=0.00)。

结论

气压弹道碎石术在输尿管结石的内镜治疗中与激光碎石术疗效相当且使用安全。比较两种方法,我们发现在手术时间、手术成功率和导管拔除时间方面没有差异,然而,LL组住院时间较短。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

10
The evolution of lasers in urology.激光技术在泌尿科领域的演进。
Ther Adv Urol. 2011 Apr;3(2):81-9. doi: 10.1177/1756287211400494.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验