• 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

EAU 指南:尿石症的介入治疗

EAU Guidelines on Interventional Treatment for Urolithiasis.

机构信息

Department of Urology, Rudolfstiftung Hospital, Vienna, Austria.

Department of Urology, Region Hospital, České Budějovice, Czech Republic; Department of Urology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic.

出版信息

Eur Urol. 2016 Mar;69(3):475-82. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.041. Epub 2015 Sep 4.

DOI:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.041
PMID:26344917
Abstract

CONTEXT

Management of urinary stones is a major issue for most urologists. Treatment modalities are minimally invasive and include extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), ureteroscopy (URS), and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL). Technological advances and changing treatment patterns have had an impact on current treatment recommendations, which have clearly shifted towards endourologic procedures. These guidelines describe recent recommendations on treatment indications and the choice of modality for ureteral and renal calculi.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the optimal measures for treatment of urinary stone disease.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Several databases were searched to identify studies on interventional treatment of urolithiasis, with special attention to the level of evidence.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Treatment decisions are made individually according to stone size, location, and (if known) composition, as well as patient preference and local expertise. Treatment recommendations have shifted to endourologic procedures such as URS and PNL, and SWL has lost its place as the first-line modality for many indications despite its proven efficacy. Open and laparoscopic techniques are restricted to limited indications. Best clinical practice standards have been established for all treatments, making all options minimally invasive with low complication rates.

CONCLUSION

Active treatment of urolithiasis is currently a minimally invasive intervention, with preference for endourologic techniques.

PATIENT SUMMARY

For active removal of stones from the kidney or ureter, technological advances have made it possible to use less invasive surgical techniques. These interventions are safe and are generally associated with shorter recovery times and less discomfort for the patient.

摘要

背景

尿路结石的治疗是大多数泌尿科医生面临的主要问题。治疗方法微创,包括体外冲击波碎石术(SWL)、输尿管镜检查术(URS)和经皮肾镜取石术(PNL)。技术进步和治疗模式的改变对当前的治疗建议产生了影响,这些建议明显倾向于腔内泌尿外科手术。本指南描述了最近关于输尿管和肾结石治疗适应证和治疗方式选择的建议。

目的

评估治疗尿路结石疾病的最佳措施。

证据获取

检索了多个数据库,以确定有关尿石症介入治疗的研究,特别关注证据水平。

证据综合

根据结石大小、位置以及(如果已知)成分,以及患者的偏好和当地专业知识,单独做出治疗决策。治疗建议已转向腔内泌尿外科手术,如 URS 和 PNL,尽管 SWL 已被证明有效,但由于其疗效,SWL 已失去许多适应证的一线治疗方法地位。开放和腹腔镜技术仅限于有限的适应证。所有治疗方法均建立了最佳临床实践标准,使所有选择都具有微创性且并发症发生率低。

结论

目前,积极治疗尿石症是一种微创干预,腔内泌尿外科技术优先。

患者总结

对于从肾脏或输尿管主动去除结石,技术进步使得使用微创性手术技术成为可能。这些干预措施安全,通常与患者较短的恢复时间和较少的不适相关。

相似文献

1
EAU Guidelines on Interventional Treatment for Urolithiasis.EAU 指南:尿石症的介入治疗
Eur Urol. 2016 Mar;69(3):475-82. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.041. Epub 2015 Sep 4.
2
[Update of the 2Sk guidelines on the diagnostics, treatment and metaphylaxis of urolithiasis (AWMF register number 043-025) : What is new?].[尿路结石诊断、治疗及群体预防的2Sk指南更新(德国医学科学院注册编号043 - 025):有哪些新内容?]
Urologe A. 2019 Nov;58(11):1304-1312. doi: 10.1007/s00120-019-01033-7.
3
EAU Guidelines on Diagnosis and Conservative Management of Urolithiasis.EAU 指南:尿石症的诊断和保守治疗管理。
Eur Urol. 2016 Mar;69(3):468-74. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.040. Epub 2015 Aug 28.
4
Treatment alternatives for urinary system stone disease in preschool aged children: results of 616 cases.学龄前儿童泌尿系统结石病的治疗选择:616例病例的结果
J Pediatr Urol. 2015 Feb;11(1):34.e1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2014.11.010. Epub 2015 Feb 3.
5
[Individualized evidence-based interventional stone treatment : One stone, many question marks?].[个体化循证介入性结石治疗:一块结石,诸多问号?]
Urologe A. 2016 Oct;55(10):1297-1301. doi: 10.1007/s00120-016-0228-9.
6
Imaging modalities and treatment of paediatric upper tract urolithiasis: A systematic review and update on behalf of the EAU urolithiasis guidelines panel.小儿上尿路结石的影像学检查方法与治疗:代表欧洲泌尿外科学会尿路结石指南小组进行的系统评价与更新
J Pediatr Urol. 2020 Oct;16(5):612-624. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2020.07.003. Epub 2020 Jul 4.
7
Best Practice in Interventional Management of Urolithiasis: An Update from the European Association of Urology Guidelines Panel for Urolithiasis 2022.最佳介入性尿路结石管理实践:2022 年欧洲泌尿外科学会尿路结石指南专家组更新。
Eur Urol Focus. 2023 Jan;9(1):199-208. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.06.014. Epub 2022 Aug 1.
8
Minimally invasive procedures for treatment of urolithiasis in transplanted kidneys.移植肾尿路结石的微创治疗方法
Exp Clin Transplant. 2014 Jun;12(3):200-4.
9
Endourologic Management (PCNL, URS, SWL) of Stones in Solitary Kidney: A Systematic Review from European Association of Urologists Young Academic Urologists and Uro-Technology Groups.经皮肾镜取石术、输尿管镜碎石取石术、体外冲击波碎石术治疗孤立肾结石的腔内泌尿外科管理:欧洲泌尿外科学会青年学者泌尿外科学组和泌尿技术组的系统评价。
J Endourol. 2020 Jan;34(1):7-17. doi: 10.1089/end.2019.0455. Epub 2019 Sep 26.
10
Treatment selection for urolithiasis: percutaneous nephrolithomy, ureteroscopy, shock wave lithotripsy, and active monitoring.尿路结石的治疗选择:经皮肾镜碎石术、输尿管镜碎石术、体外冲击波碎石术和主动监测。
World J Urol. 2017 Sep;35(9):1395-1399. doi: 10.1007/s00345-017-2030-8. Epub 2017 Mar 16.

引用本文的文献

1
Ureteroscopy in pediatric urolithiasis: techniques, challenges, and outcomes.小儿尿路结石的输尿管镜检查:技术、挑战及结果
World J Urol. 2025 Sep 6;43(1):541. doi: 10.1007/s00345-025-05910-z.
2
Intelligent pressure-controlled ureteral access sheath combined with flexible ureteroscopy versus flexible ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones less than 3 cm in diameter: a comparative efficacy study.智能压力控制输尿管鞘联合软性输尿管镜与软性输尿管镜及经皮肾镜取石术治疗直径小于3厘米肾结石的疗效比较研究
World J Urol. 2025 Sep 3;43(1):538. doi: 10.1007/s00345-025-05907-8.
3
Should percutaneous nephrolithotomy be performed in patients with severe chronic kidney disease? A closer look at renal function outcomes.
严重慢性肾脏病患者是否应行经皮肾镜取石术?深入探讨肾功能结局。
World J Urol. 2025 Sep 3;43(1):533. doi: 10.1007/s00345-025-05906-9.
4
The impact of the ratio of renal parenchyma to renal volume on stone-free rates after RIRS: a retrospective study.肾实质与肾体积之比对逆行肾内手术(RIRS)后无结石率的影响:一项回顾性研究。
Sci Rep. 2025 Sep 1;15(1):32073. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-15494-8.
5
Comparative efficacy and safety of ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal calculi: a systematic review and meta-analysis.超微经皮肾镜取石术与标准经皮肾镜取石术治疗肾结石的疗效和安全性比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Int Urol Nephrol. 2025 Aug 29. doi: 10.1007/s11255-025-04762-1.
6
A cross-sectional and bioinformatics-based analysis: perirenal fat thickness as a superior predictor of kidney stone disease.一项基于横断面和生物信息学的分析:肾周脂肪厚度作为肾结石疾病的更佳预测指标。
Lipids Health Dis. 2025 Aug 29;24(1):269. doi: 10.1186/s12944-025-02686-4.
7
Safety and efficacy of flexible and navigable suction combined with retrograde flexible ureteroscopy in the management of infectious stones.可弯曲可导航吸引联合逆行可弯曲输尿管镜治疗感染性结石的安全性和有效性
BMC Infect Dis. 2025 Aug 28;25(1):1079. doi: 10.1186/s12879-025-11508-y.
8
Relocation and evacuation of stone fragments using 7.5 Fr flexible ureteroscope with direct-in-scope suction: an experimental study.使用带有直视下吸引功能的7.5 Fr 软性输尿管镜对结石碎片进行重新定位和取出:一项实验研究。
Cent European J Urol. 2025;78(2):200-205. doi: 10.5173/ceju.2024.0269. Epub 2025 May 7.
9
Efficacy and safety of two tip flexible suctioning ureteral access sheaths combined with a 7.5Fr flexible ureteroscope: a retrospective study.两种尖端可弯曲的输尿管吸引鞘联合7.5Fr可弯曲输尿管镜的疗效与安全性:一项回顾性研究
Front Surg. 2025 Aug 7;12:1628264. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2025.1628264. eCollection 2025.
10
Clinical and cost-effectiveness of percutaneous nephrolithotomy, flexible ureterorenoscopy and extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for lower pole stones: the PUrE RCTs.经皮肾镜取石术、软性输尿管肾镜检查和体外冲击波碎石术治疗下极结石的临床疗效及成本效益:PUrE随机对照试验
Health Technol Assess. 2025 Aug;29(40):1-186. doi: 10.3310/WFRE6844.