• 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

无侧卧位改良仰卧位下微创经皮肾镜取石术与标准经皮肾镜取石术治疗肾结石:单中心经验。

Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs standard PCNL for management of renal stones in the flank-free modified supine position: single-center experience.

机构信息

Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Zagazig University, 44519, Zagazig, Egypt.

出版信息

Urolithiasis. 2017 Dec;45(6):585-589. doi: 10.1007/s00240-017-0966-1. Epub 2017 Feb 22.

DOI:10.1007/s00240-017-0966-1
PMID:28229197
Abstract

To assess the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) as compared to standard PCNL (sPCNL) for management of 2-3-cm renal stones in the flank-free modified supine position. Between September 2010 and December 2013, 150 patients (168 renal units) with 2-3-cm renal stones were prospectively randomized into two treatment groups; Group A (75 patients/87 renal units) treated by mPCNL and Group B (75 patients/81 renal units) treated by sPCNL. In both groups, the patients were placed in the flank-free modified supine position. In mPCNL group, the tract was dilated up to 16.5 F whereas in sPCNL group the tract was dilated up to 30 F. Both groups were compared regarding several perioperative parameters. No significant difference was recorded among both groups regarding fluoroscopy time (4.3 ± 1.3 vs 4.8 ± 2.1 min, p = 0.06), operative time (83.2 ± 17.3 vs 78.6 ± 24.4 min, p = 0.16), hospital stay (4.3 vs 4.5 days, p = 0.76), VAS score (3.2 ± 0.6 vs 3.3 ± 0.8, p = 0.36) and need for analgesia. The mean drop in hemoglobin level and the incidence of bleeding that necessitated blood transfusion were significantly lower in the mPCNL group (0.6 ± 0.1 vs 1.9 ± 1.1 g/dl, p < 0.0001 and 1.2 vs 9.8%, p = 0.03, respectively). Although the stone-free rate was higher in the sPCNL group, but this was statistically insignificant (97.1 vs 95.4%, p = 0.86). Mini-PCNL is effective for managing renal calculi with comparable operative time and stone-free rate to standard PCNL with the merit of higher safety due to lower incidence of bleeding that necessitates blood transfusion.

摘要

在无侧卧位改良仰卧位下,评估微创经皮肾镜取石术(mPCNL)与标准经皮肾镜取石术(sPCNL)治疗 2-3cm 肾结石的安全性和有效性。2010 年 9 月至 2013 年 12 月,前瞻性随机将 150 例(168 个肾脏单位)2-3cm 肾结石患者分为两组:A 组(75 例/87 个肾脏单位)行 mPCNL 治疗,B 组(75 例/81 个肾脏单位)行 sPCNL 治疗。两组患者均采用无侧卧位改良仰卧位。mPCNL 组输尿管扩张至 16.5F,sPCNL 组输尿管扩张至 30F。比较两组围手术期各项参数。两组患者的透视时间(4.3±1.3 与 4.8±2.1min,p=0.06)、手术时间(83.2±17.3 与 78.6±24.4min,p=0.16)、住院时间(4.3 与 4.5d,p=0.76)、VAS 评分(3.2±0.6 与 3.3±0.8,p=0.36)和镇痛需求无显著差异。mPCNL 组血红蛋白水平下降程度和需要输血的出血发生率明显低于 sPCNL 组(0.6±0.1 与 1.9±1.1g/dl,p<0.0001 和 1.2%与 9.8%,p=0.03)。sPCNL 组的结石清除率更高,但无统计学意义(97.1%与 95.4%,p=0.86)。mPCNL 治疗肾结石有效,手术时间和结石清除率与 sPCNL 相似,但出血发生率较低,需要输血的比例较低,安全性更高。

相似文献

1
Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs standard PCNL for management of renal stones in the flank-free modified supine position: single-center experience.无侧卧位改良仰卧位下微创经皮肾镜取石术与标准经皮肾镜取石术治疗肾结石:单中心经验。
Urolithiasis. 2017 Dec;45(6):585-589. doi: 10.1007/s00240-017-0966-1. Epub 2017 Feb 22.
2
Mini- versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of pediatric renal stones: is smaller enough?微通道与标准经皮肾镜碎石术治疗小儿肾结石:更小就是更好吗?
J Pediatr Urol. 2019 Dec;15(6):664.e1-664.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2019.09.009. Epub 2019 Sep 16.
3
Modified supine versus prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Surgical outcomes from a tertiary teaching hospital.改良俯卧位与仰卧位经皮肾镜取石术:来自一家三级教学医院的手术结果。
Investig Clin Urol. 2016 Jul;57(4):268-73. doi: 10.4111/icu.2016.57.4.268. Epub 2016 Jul 5.
4
Fluoroscopy versus ultrasonography guided mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease.荧光透视引导与超声引导下经皮肾镜取石术治疗常染色体显性多囊肾病患者的比较
Urolithiasis. 2017 Jun;45(3):297-303. doi: 10.1007/s00240-016-0901-x. Epub 2016 Jul 4.
5
Is percutaneous nephrolithotomy effective and safe in infants younger than 2 Years old? Comparison of mini standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy.经皮肾镜碎石术在 2 岁以下婴儿中是否有效且安全?迷你标准经皮肾镜碎石术的比较。
J Pediatr Urol. 2024 Jun;20(3):402.e1-402.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2023.12.004. Epub 2023 Dec 14.
6
Comparison of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of large kidney stones: a randomized prospective study.经皮肾镜取石术与标准经皮肾镜取石术治疗大肾结石的比较:一项随机前瞻性研究。
Urolithiasis. 2019 Jun;47(3):289-295. doi: 10.1007/s00240-018-1061-y. Epub 2018 Jun 1.
7
Comparison of renal pelvic pressure and postoperative fever incidence between standard- and mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy.标准通道与微通道经皮肾镜取石术肾盂压力及术后发热发生率的比较
Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2017 Jan;33(1):36-43. doi: 10.1016/j.kjms.2016.10.012. Epub 2016 Dec 22.
8
Flank-Free Modified Supine Prone Ultra-Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Treatment of Medium-Sized Renal Pelvic Stone: A Randomized Clinical Trial.侧卧位改良俯卧位超微经皮肾镜取石术治疗中等大小肾盂结石:一项随机临床试验。
J Endourol. 2022 Sep;36(9):1149-1154. doi: 10.1089/end.2022.0016. Epub 2022 Jul 26.
9
Analysis of the factors affecting blood loss in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a registry of the Spanish Association of Urology in the supine position.经皮肾镜取石术中影响失血的因素分析:西班牙泌尿外科协会仰卧位登记研究
Actas Urol Esp. 2013 Oct;37(9):527-32. doi: 10.1016/j.acuro.2013.05.001. Epub 2013 Jul 11.
10
Mini vs standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones: a comparative study.微通道与标准经皮肾镜取石术治疗肾结石:一项对照研究。
Urolithiasis. 2019 Apr;47(2):207-214. doi: 10.1007/s00240-018-1055-9. Epub 2018 Mar 16.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of minimally invasive suction-evacuation versus standard nephrostomy sheaths for the treatment of partial staghorn stones.微创抽吸排空术与标准肾造瘘鞘治疗部分鹿角形结石的比较
Urolithiasis. 2025 Jul 24;53(1):143. doi: 10.1007/s00240-025-01807-z.
2
Pain management in percutaneous nephrolithotomy - an approach rooted in pathophysiology.经皮肾镜取石术中的疼痛管理——一种基于病理生理学的方法。
Nat Rev Urol. 2025 Jan 13. doi: 10.1038/s41585-024-00973-w.
3
Domestic single-port robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery for pyelotomy combined with shockwave lithotripsy: the first case report.

本文引用的文献

1
Flank free modified supine position: A new modification for supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy.侧方无游离仰卧位:仰卧位经皮肾镜取石术的一种新改良方法。
Arab J Urol. 2012 Jun;10(2):143-8. doi: 10.1016/j.aju.2011.12.008. Epub 2012 Mar 7.
2
Minimally invasive versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis.微创经皮肾镜取石术与标准经皮肾镜取石术:一项荟萃分析。
Urolithiasis. 2015 Nov;43(6):563-70. doi: 10.1007/s00240-015-0808-y. Epub 2015 Aug 5.
3
Mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of renal and upper ureteral stones: Lessons learned from a review of the literature.
国内单孔机器人辅助腹腔镜肾盂切开取石术联合冲击波碎石术:首例病例报告
Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2024 Oct 2;86(11):6854-6858. doi: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000002630. eCollection 2024 Nov.
4
Comparison of laparoscopic-assisted flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy with percutaneous nephrolithotripsy and flexible ureteroscopy lithotripsy: a case-control study and meta-analysis.腹腔镜辅助下软性输尿管镜碎石术与经皮肾镜碎石术及软性输尿管镜碎石术的比较:一项病例对照研究与荟萃分析。
Int Urol Nephrol. 2025 Mar;57(3):741-751. doi: 10.1007/s11255-024-04250-y. Epub 2024 Oct 23.
5
Mini and Standard Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Obese Patients. Results from a Single-surgeon Large Series.肥胖患者的微创与标准经皮肾镜取石术。单术者大样本系列研究结果
Eur Urol Open Sci. 2024 Apr 4;63:113-118. doi: 10.1016/j.euros.2024.03.011. eCollection 2024 May.
6
Micro cost-effectiveness analysis of standard vs. mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy A single Canadian institution's experience.标准经皮肾镜取石术与迷你经皮肾镜取石术的微观成本效益分析:一家加拿大机构的经验
Can Urol Assoc J. 2024 Jun;18(6):169-178. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.8679.
7
Super-stiff guidewire or loach guidewire during percutaneous nephrolithotomy?经皮肾镜取石术中使用超硬导丝还是泥鳅导丝?
BJUI Compass. 2023 Apr 28;4(5):562-567. doi: 10.1002/bco2.219. eCollection 2023 Sep.
8
Efficacy and safety of various endosurgical procedures for management of large renal stone: a systemic review and network meta-analysis of randomised control trials.各种内镜手术治疗大肾结石的疗效和安全性:随机对照试验的系统评价和网络荟萃分析。
Urolithiasis. 2023 Jun 8;51(1):87. doi: 10.1007/s00240-023-01459-x.
9
Evaluation of mini-PCNL and RIRS for renal stones 1-2 cm in an economically challenged setting: A prospective cohort study.在经济条件有限的情况下对1-2厘米肾结石行迷你经皮肾镜取石术和逆行肾内手术的评估:一项前瞻性队列研究。
Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2022 Jul 31;81:104235. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2022.104235. eCollection 2022 Sep.
10
Comparison of postoperative outcomes of mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis.微创经皮肾镜取石术与标准经皮肾镜取石术术后疗效比较的Meta 分析。
Urolithiasis. 2022 Oct;50(5):523-533. doi: 10.1007/s00240-022-01349-8. Epub 2022 Aug 11.
微创经皮肾镜取石术治疗肾及输尿管上段结石:文献综述所得经验教训
Urol Ann. 2015 Apr-Jun;7(2):141-8. doi: 10.4103/0974-7796.152927.
4
Prospective comparative study of miniperc and standard PNL for treatment of 1 to 2 cm size renal stone.微创经皮肾镜取石术与标准经皮肾镜取石术治疗 1 至 2cm 肾结石的前瞻性对比研究。
BJU Int. 2011 Sep;108(6):896-9; discussion 899-900. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09936.x. Epub 2011 Apr 8.
5
Minimally invasive tract in percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones.经皮肾镜取石术治疗肾结石的微创通道。
J Endourol. 2010 Oct;24(10):1579-82. doi: 10.1089/end.2009.0581.
6
Do patients benefit from miniaturized tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy? A comparative prospective study.患者是否受益于微型非管式经皮肾镜取石术?一项前瞻性对比研究。
J Endourol. 2010 Jul;24(7):1075-9. doi: 10.1089/end.2010.0111.
7
Does a smaller tract in percutaneous nephrolithotomy contribute to less invasiveness? A prospective comparative study.经皮肾镜取石术中较小的通道是否会降低侵袭性?一项前瞻性对比研究。
Urology. 2010 Jan;75(1):56-61. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2009.06.006. Epub 2009 Oct 2.
8
Miniperc? No, thank you!微创经皮肾镜取石术?不,谢谢!
Eur Urol. 2007 Mar;51(3):810-4; discussion 815. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.07.047. Epub 2006 Aug 11.
9
Prospective randomized study of various techniques of percutaneous nephrolithotomy.经皮肾镜取石术不同技术的前瞻性随机研究。
Urology. 2001 Sep;58(3):345-50. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01225-0.
10
The "mini-perc" technique: a less invasive alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy.“迷你经皮肾镜取石术”技术:经皮肾镜取石术的一种侵入性较小的替代方法。
World J Urol. 1998;16(6):371-4. doi: 10.1007/s003450050083.