• 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

相似文献

1
Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy without radiation: Ultrasound localization is as effective as fluoroscopy.无辐射体外冲击波碎石术:超声定位与荧光透视一样有效。
Urol Ann. 2016 Oct-Dec;8(4):454-457. doi: 10.4103/0974-7796.192104.
2
Comparison of ultrasound-assisted and pure fluoroscopy-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for renal stones.超声辅助与纯透视引导体外冲击波碎石术治疗肾结石的比较。
BMC Urol. 2020 Nov 10;20(1):183. doi: 10.1186/s12894-020-00756-6.
3
Decreased Radiation Exposure and Increased Efficacy in Extracorporeal Lithotripsy Using a New Ultrasound Stone Locking System.使用新型超声结石锁定系统降低体外冲击波碎石术中的辐射暴露并提高疗效。
J Endourol. 2015 Nov;29(11):1263-9. doi: 10.1089/end.2015.0175. Epub 2015 Aug 21.
4
Importance of precise imaging for stone identification during shockwave lithotripsy: a critical evaluation of "OptiVision" as a post-processing radiography imaging modality.精确成像在冲击波碎石术中对结石识别的重要性:“OptiVision”后处理射线照相成像方式的批判性评价。
Urolithiasis. 2022 Feb;50(1):87-93. doi: 10.1007/s00240-021-01284-0. Epub 2021 Sep 15.
5
Which is the best treatment of pediatric upper urinary tract stones among extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review.体外冲击波碎石术、经皮肾镜取石术和逆行性肾内手术治疗小儿上尿路结石的最佳治疗方法:系统评价。
BMC Urol. 2019 Oct 23;19(1):98. doi: 10.1186/s12894-019-0520-2.
6
Ultrasound-Guided Shockwave Lithotripsy Reduces Radiation Exposure and Has Better Outcomes for Pediatric Cystine Stones.超声引导下冲击波碎石术可减少小儿胱氨酸结石的辐射暴露并取得更好的治疗效果。
Urol Int. 2017;98(4):429-435. doi: 10.1159/000446220. Epub 2016 Apr 30.
7
Erector spinae plane block prior to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy decreases fluoroscopy time and promise a comfortable procedure for renal stones: A prospective randomized study.体外冲击波碎石术前行竖脊肌平面阻滞可减少透视时间,并为肾结石患者带来舒适的手术过程:一项前瞻性随机研究。
8
[New ultrasound navigational system in extracorporeal lithotripsy: decreased fluoroscopy and radiation].体外冲击波碎石术中的新型超声导航系统:减少荧光透视和辐射
Prog Urol. 2013 Sep;23(10):856-60. doi: 10.1016/j.purol.2013.03.007. Epub 2013 May 16.
9
Fluoroscopy free flexible ureteroscopy with holmium: Yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser lithotripsy for removal of renal calculi.无荧光透视的软性输尿管镜联合钬:钇铝石榴石激光碎石术治疗肾结石。
Arab J Urol. 2016 May 19;14(2):123-30. doi: 10.1016/j.aju.2016.04.004. eCollection 2016 Jun.
10
Is stone radiodensity a useful parameter for predicting outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for stones < or = 2 cm?对于直径小于或等于2厘米的结石,结石的放射密度是否是预测体外冲击波碎石术结果的有用参数?
Int Braz J Urol. 2005 Jan-Feb;31(1):3-8; discussion 9. doi: 10.1590/s1677-55382005000100002.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of ultrasound-guided and fluoroscopy-guided shockwave lithotripsy in infants under 24 months.24个月以下婴儿超声引导与荧光透视引导冲击波碎石术的比较。
Int Urol Nephrol. 2025 Sep;57(9):2893-2898. doi: 10.1007/s11255-025-04608-w. Epub 2025 Jun 16.
2
Radiation exposure of urologists during endourological procedures: a systematic review.泌尿科医生在腔内泌尿外科手术中的辐射暴露:系统评价。
World J Urol. 2024 May 9;42(1):310. doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-05023-z.
3
Radiation exposure of patients during endourological procedures.患者在腔内泌尿外科手术过程中的辐射暴露。
World J Urol. 2024 Apr 27;42(1):266. doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-04953-y.
4
Effect of targeting and generator type on efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.靶向和发生器类型对体外冲击波碎石术疗效的影响。
Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub. 2022 Dec;166(4):434-440. doi: 10.5507/bp.2022.029. Epub 2022 Jun 27.
5
Comparison of ultrasound-assisted and pure fluoroscopy-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for renal stones.超声辅助与纯透视引导体外冲击波碎石术治疗肾结石的比较。
BMC Urol. 2020 Nov 10;20(1):183. doi: 10.1186/s12894-020-00756-6.
6
Optimisation of shock wave lithotripsy: a systematic review of technical aspects to improve outcomes.冲击波碎石术的优化:对改善治疗效果的技术方面的系统评价
Transl Androl Urol. 2019 Sep;8(Suppl 4):S389-S397. doi: 10.21037/tau.2019.06.07.
7
Oral dissolution therapy for renal radiolucent stones, outcome, and factors affecting response: A prospective study.肾透X线结石的口服溶石疗法、结果及影响疗效的因素:一项前瞻性研究。
Urol Ann. 2019 Oct-Dec;11(4):369-373. doi: 10.4103/UA.UA_20_19.

本文引用的文献

1
A clinical nomogram to predict the successful shock wave lithotripsy of renal and ureteral calculi.一种用于预测肾结石和输尿管结石冲击波碎石术成功的临床列线图。
J Urol. 2011 Aug;186(2):556-62. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.03.109.
2
Treatment selection and outcomes: renal calculi.治疗选择与结果:肾结石
Urol Clin North Am. 2007 Aug;34(3):409-19. doi: 10.1016/j.ucl.2007.04.005.
3
Management of kidney stones.肾结石的管理
BMJ. 2007 Mar 3;334(7591):468-72. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39113.480185.80.
4
Preoperative nomograms for predicting stone-free rate after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.用于预测体外冲击波碎石术后结石清除率的术前列线图。
J Urol. 2006 Oct;176(4 Pt 1):1453-6; discussion 1456-7. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.06.089.
5
Predictive factors of lower calyceal stone clearance after Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy (ESWL): a focus on the infundibulopelvic anatomy.体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)后下盏结石清除的预测因素:聚焦于肾盂漏斗部解剖结构
Eur Urol. 2005 Aug;48(2):296-302; discussion 302. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.02.017. Epub 2005 Mar 9.
6
Impact of anatomical pielocaliceal topography in the treatment of renal lower calyces stones with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.解剖学肾盂肾盏形态对体外冲击波碎石术治疗肾下盏结石的影响
Int J Urol. 2005 Jun;12(6):525-32. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2005.01101.x.
7
Is newer always better? A comparative study of 3 lithotriptor generations.更新的就一定更好吗?三代碎石机的比较研究。
J Urol. 2005 Jun;173(6):2013-6. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000158042.41319.c4.
8
Prediction of success rate after extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy of renal stones--a multivariate analysis model.肾结石体外冲击波碎石术后成功率的预测——一种多变量分析模型
Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2004;38(2):161-7. doi: 10.1080/00365590310022626.
9
Extracorporeally induced destruction of kidney stones by shock waves.体外冲击波诱导肾结石破坏
Lancet. 1980 Dec 13;2(8207):1265-8. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(80)92335-1.
10
[Extracorporeal hydro-electric shockwave lithotripsy (Sonolith 2000). Analysis of 137 records of a first-year experience].[体外水电冲击波碎石术(Sonolith 2000)。对第一年经验的137例记录的分析]
Acta Urol Belg. 1989;57(3):743-54.

无辐射体外冲击波碎石术:超声定位与荧光透视一样有效。

Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy without radiation: Ultrasound localization is as effective as fluoroscopy.

作者信息

Smith Hazel Elizabeth, Bryant David Alistair, KooNg Jenny, Chapman Richard Alexander, Lewis Gareth

机构信息

Department of Urology, Sunderland Royal Hospital, Sunderland, SR4 7TP, United Kingdom; Department of Urology, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, DD1 9SY, United Kingdom.

Department of Urology, Sunderland Royal Hospital, Sunderland, SR4 7TP, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Urol Ann. 2016 Oct-Dec;8(4):454-457. doi: 10.4103/0974-7796.192104.

DOI:10.4103/0974-7796.192104
PMID:28057991
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5100152/
Abstract

CONTEXT

Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is the first-line treatment for renal calculi in most cases. Recent technology has allowed lithotriptor machines to localize stones using fluoroscopy or ultrasound (US).

AIM

The aim of this study is to compare stone free rates (SFR) using two techniques.

METHODS

This is a single center retrospective cohort study. We have studied 95 patients with renal calculi undergoing first SWL treatment with localization using US (48 pts) and fluoroscopy (47 pts). SFR was defined as fragments ≤2 m at 4 weeks post procedure on x-ray or US. Patient records were reviewed.

RESULTS

Stone size and location, age and body mass index were comparable between groups. Stones ≤7 mm had better SFR with US 86% (18/21) compared to fluoroscopy 59% (10/17) P= 0.08. Overall the US group had similar SFR to the fluoroscopy group for stones of all sizes and locations with 60% (29/48) compared to 45% (21/47)P= 0.18. Radiation exposure was the biggest difference between techniques with a mean radiation dose (mGy/cm) in the US group of 103 (0-233) and 2113 (241-7821) in the fluoroscopy group. Radiation use in the US group was due to the use of a single shot pre- and post-procedure, this could be reduced to zero.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data show equivalent outcomes using US compared to the traditional fluoroscopy localization technique. We would encourage departments to develop the use of US localization to reduce radiation exposure to patients.

摘要

背景

在大多数情况下,体外冲击波碎石术(SWL)是肾结石的一线治疗方法。最近的技术已使碎石机能够使用荧光透视或超声(US)对结石进行定位。

目的

本研究的目的是比较使用两种技术的结石清除率(SFR)。

方法

这是一项单中心回顾性队列研究。我们研究了95例接受首次SWL治疗的肾结石患者,其中48例使用US定位,47例使用荧光透视定位。SFR定义为术后4周时X线或US检查显示结石碎片≤2 mm。对患者记录进行了回顾。

结果

两组之间的结石大小和位置、年龄和体重指数具有可比性。对于≤7 mm的结石,US组的SFR更好,为86%(18/21),而荧光透视组为59%(10/17),P = 0.08。总体而言,对于所有大小和位置的结石,US组的SFR与荧光透视组相似,分别为60%(29/48)和45%(21/47),P = 0.18。两种技术之间最大的差异在于辐射暴露,US组的平均辐射剂量(mGy/cm)为103(0 - 233),荧光透视组为2113(241 - 7821)。US组使用辐射是由于在术前和术后使用了单次扫描,这可以降至零。

结论

我们的数据表明,与传统的荧光透视定位技术相比,使用US的结果相当。我们鼓励各科室开展US定位的应用,以减少患者的辐射暴露。