• 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

经输尿管镜真空辅助取石术与 MPCNL 治疗 2-4cm 肾结石的比较。

RIRS with Vacuum-Assisted Ureteral Access Sheath versus MPCNL for the Treatment of 2-4 cm Renal Stone.

机构信息

Urology, Fifth Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.

Minimally Invasive Technique and Product Translational Center, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.

出版信息

Biomed Res Int. 2020 May 14;2020:8052013. doi: 10.1155/2020/8052013. eCollection 2020.

DOI:10.1155/2020/8052013
PMID:32509870
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7245689/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Comparison of outcomes between RIRS with vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath (V-UAS) and MPCNL in the treatment of renal stone.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

28 patients with 2-4 cm renal stone were treated using RIRS with 14/16 F V-UAS. The outcomes were compared to those who underwent MPCNL with 16 F Amplatz sheath using a matched-pair analysis in a 1 : 2 scenario. Matching criteria included stone size, location and laterality, gender, age, BMI, and degree of hydronephrosis. Patients' demographics, perioperative and postoperative characteristics, complications, stone-free rate (SFR), and auxiliary procedures were compared.

RESULTS

Mean operative times for the RIRS and MPCNL groups were 72.4 ± 21.3 minutes and 67.4 ± 25 minutes ( = 0.042). Postoperative pain was significantly less in the RIRS group. The initial SFR was 50% for the RIRS group and 73.2% for the MPCNL group ( = 0.035). The final SFR at postoperative three months improved to 89.3% for the RIRS group and 92.9% for the MPCNL group ( = 0.681). The auxiliary procedure rates were higher in the RIRS group (42.9% vs. 25%, = 0.095). The overall complication rate in the RIRS group was lower, but the significant difference was not found.

CONCLUSION

In the treatment of 2-4 cm renal stone, using V-UAS in RIRS can improve surgical efficiency with lower postoperative early pain scores. Comparing with MPCNL, its initial SFR was more depressed, and there is still a trend towards requiring more auxiliary procedures to achieve comparable final SFR.

摘要

目的

比较 RIRS 联合真空辅助输尿管镜鞘(V-UAS)与 MPCNL 治疗肾结石的疗效。

材料与方法

28 例 2-4cm 肾结石患者采用 14/16F V-UAS 行 RIRS 治疗,通过 1:2 配对分析,将其与采用 16F Amplatz 鞘行 MPCNL 的患者的结果进行比较。匹配标准包括结石大小、位置和侧别、性别、年龄、BMI 和肾积水程度。比较患者的人口统计学、围手术期和术后特征、并发症、结石清除率(SFR)和辅助手术。

结果

RIRS 组和 MPCNL 组的平均手术时间分别为 72.4±21.3 分钟和 67.4±25 分钟(=0.042)。RIRS 组术后疼痛明显较轻。RIRS 组初始 SFR 为 50%,MPCNL 组为 73.2%(=0.035)。RIRS 组术后 3 个月最终 SFR 提高至 89.3%,MPCNL 组提高至 92.9%(=0.681)。RIRS 组辅助手术率较高(42.9%比 25%,=0.095)。RIRS 组总体并发症发生率较低,但差异无统计学意义。

结论

在治疗 2-4cm 肾结石时,RIRS 联合 V-UAS 可提高手术效率,降低术后早期疼痛评分。与 MPCNL 相比,其初始 SFR 较低,仍有更多辅助手术的趋势,以达到可比的最终 SFR。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/46c0/7245689/1dbc2dc27532/BMRI2020-8052013.001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/46c0/7245689/1dbc2dc27532/BMRI2020-8052013.001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/46c0/7245689/1dbc2dc27532/BMRI2020-8052013.001.jpg

相似文献

1
RIRS with Vacuum-Assisted Ureteral Access Sheath versus MPCNL for the Treatment of 2-4 cm Renal Stone.经输尿管镜真空辅助取石术与 MPCNL 治疗 2-4cm 肾结石的比较。
Biomed Res Int. 2020 May 14;2020:8052013. doi: 10.1155/2020/8052013. eCollection 2020.
2
Clinical and psychological outcomes of patients undergoing Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery and Miniaturised Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for kidney stones. A preliminary study.逆行性肾内手术和小型化经皮肾镜取石术治疗肾结石患者的临床和心理结果:一项初步研究。
Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2020 Jan 14;91(4):256-260. doi: 10.4081/aiua.2019.4.256.
3
RIRS versus mPCNL for single renal stone of 2-3 cm: clinical outcome and cost-effective analysis in Chinese medical setting.经皮肾镜碎石取石术与输尿管软镜碎石术治疗 2-3cm 单发肾结石:中国医疗环境下的临床结局和成本效益分析。
Urolithiasis. 2013 Feb;41(1):73-8. doi: 10.1007/s00240-012-0533-8. Epub 2012 Dec 23.
4
An easy risk stratification to recommend the optimal patients with 2-3 cm kidney stones to receive retrograde intrarenal surgery or mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy.一种简单的风险分层方法,用于推荐最佳的 2-3cm 肾结石患者接受逆行肾盂内手术或微创经皮肾镜取石术。
Urolithiasis. 2020 Apr;48(2):167-173. doi: 10.1007/s00240-019-01134-0. Epub 2019 May 17.
5
The comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery for stones larger than 2 cm in patients with a solitary kidney: a matched-pair analysis.单肾患者中微创经皮肾镜取石术与逆行肾内手术治疗直径大于2cm结石的比较:配对分析
World J Urol. 2015 Aug;33(8):1159-64. doi: 10.1007/s00345-014-1420-4. Epub 2014 Oct 21.
6
Efficacy of Aspiration-Assisted Ureteral Access Sheath (ClearPETRA) in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery.抽吸辅助输尿管通路鞘(ClearPETRA)在逆行性肾内手术中的疗效
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2024 May;34(5):420-424. doi: 10.1089/lap.2024.0076. Epub 2024 Mar 28.
7
Comparative efficacy between retrograde intrarenal surgery with vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath and minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy for 1-2 cm infectious upper ureteral stones: a prospective, randomized controlled study.真空辅助输尿管通路鞘逆行肾内手术与微创经皮肾镜取石术治疗1-2厘米感染性上段输尿管结石的疗效比较:一项前瞻性随机对照研究
Front Surg. 2023 Jul 7;10:1200717. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1200717. eCollection 2023.
8
RIRS with FV-UAS vs. MPCNL for 2-3-cm upper urinary tract stones: a prospective study.硬镜联合钬激光碎石术与微创经皮肾镜取石术治疗 2-3cm 上尿路结石:一项前瞻性研究。
Urolithiasis. 2024 Feb 10;52(1):31. doi: 10.1007/s00240-024-01539-6.
9
The Acceptable Criterion of Stone Burden and the Significant Factors to Choose Retrograde Intrarenal Stone Surgery or Miniaturized Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for the Treatment of Renal Stones >10 mm.肾结石直径>10mm时结石负荷的可接受标准及选择逆行性肾内手术或微通道经皮肾镜取石术的重要因素
J Endourol. 2017 Oct;31(10):1012-1018. doi: 10.1089/end.2017.0244.
10
Comparative analysis of retrograde intrarenal surgery and modified ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower pole renal stones (1.5-3.5 cm).逆行性肾内手术与改良超微经皮肾镜取石术治疗下极肾结石(1.5-3.5cm)的对比分析。
BMC Urol. 2020 Mar 16;20(1):27. doi: 10.1186/s12894-020-00586-6.

引用本文的文献

1
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.
2
Clinical efficacy analysis of two different types of ureteral access sheaths in RIRS for the treatment of 2-4 cm renal stones.两种不同类型输尿管通路鞘在逆行性肾内手术治疗2-4厘米肾结石中的临床疗效分析
World J Urol. 2025 Jun 20;43(1):381. doi: 10.1007/s00345-025-05776-1.
3
Efficacy and Safety of Tip-Flexible Suctioning Ureteral Access in Renal Stone Treatment.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparison between retrograde intrarenal surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotripsy in the management of renal stones: A meta-analysis.逆行性肾内手术与经皮肾镜碎石术治疗肾结石的比较:一项荟萃分析。
Exp Ther Med. 2019 Aug;18(2):1366-1374. doi: 10.3892/etm.2019.7710. Epub 2019 Jun 25.
2
Propensity Score-Matched Analysis Comparing Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery with Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Large Stones in Patients with a Solitary Kidney.倾向评分匹配分析:比较逆行性肾内手术与经皮肾镜取石术治疗孤立肾患者的大结石
J Endourol. 2018 Mar;32(3):198-204. doi: 10.1089/end.2017.0482.
3
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for the treatment of kidney stones up to 2 cm in patients with solitary kidney: a single centre experience.
可弯曲头部输尿管镜吸引在肾结石治疗中的疗效与安全性
Med Sci Monit. 2025 May 30;31:e947055. doi: 10.12659/MSM.947055.
4
Size matters: an in vitro evaluation of flexible vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheaths.尺寸很重要:柔性真空辅助输尿管进入鞘的体外评估
Urolithiasis. 2025 May 17;53(1):94. doi: 10.1007/s00240-025-01710-7.
5
Influence of pre-stenting on flexible and navigable suction (FANS) access sheath outcomes. Results of a prospective multicentre study by the EAU Section of Endourology and the global FANS collaborative group.预支架置入对可弯曲导航吸引(FANS)接入鞘结果的影响。欧洲泌尿外科学会腔内泌尿外科分会和全球FANS协作组的一项前瞻性多中心研究结果。
Cent European J Urol. 2025;78(1):85-93. doi: 10.5173/ceju.2024.0197. Epub 2024 Nov 28.
6
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery on mid-sized lower calyx stones- a systematic review of last decade.经皮肾镜取石术与逆行肾内手术治疗中型下盏结石的十年系统评价
BMC Urol. 2025 Apr 11;25(1):84. doi: 10.1186/s12894-025-01771-1.
7
Comparison of safety and efficacy of negative pressure aspiration assisted retrograde intrarenal surgery and traditional percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones larger than 2 cm: a systematic review and meta-analysis.负压吸引辅助逆行肾内手术与传统经皮肾镜取石术治疗大于2cm上尿路结石的安全性和有效性比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Int J Surg. 2025 May 1;111(5):3613-3628. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000002363.
8
The utility of flexible and navigable suction access sheath (FANS) in patients undergoing same session flexible ureteroscopy for bilateral renal calculi: a global prospective multicenter analysis by EAU endourology.可弯曲导航式抽吸接入鞘(FANS)在双侧肾结石同期行可弯曲输尿管镜检查患者中的应用:欧洲泌尿外科学会腔内泌尿外科全球前瞻性多中心分析
World J Urol. 2025 Feb 28;43(1):142. doi: 10.1007/s00345-025-05477-9.
9
Comparison of flexible vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath versus conventional sheath combined with single-use flexible ureteroscope in the treatment of renal calculi.柔性真空辅助输尿管接入鞘与传统鞘联合一次性柔性输尿管镜治疗肾结石的比较
Urolithiasis. 2025 Feb 22;53(1):37. doi: 10.1007/s00240-025-01699-z.
10
Innovative approaches to large lower calyceal stones (10-20 mm): evaluating modified T-tilt position and lower calyx hydrodilatation techniques in flexible ureteroscopy versus hydrodilatation alone: prospective randomized controlled study.治疗大的下盏结石(10 - 20毫米)的创新方法:对比单纯水扩张术,评估在软性输尿管镜检查中改良T形倾斜体位和下盏水扩张技术:前瞻性随机对照研究
Int Urol Nephrol. 2025 Jan 31. doi: 10.1007/s11255-024-04339-4.
经皮肾镜取石术与逆行性肾内手术治疗单肾肾结石患者2厘米及以下结石:单中心经验
BMC Urol. 2017 Jan 18;17(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s12894-017-0200-z.
4
Infective complications after retrograde intrarenal surgery: a new standardized classification system.逆行性肾内手术术后感染性并发症:一种新的标准化分类系统
Int Urol Nephrol. 2016 Nov;48(11):1757-1762. doi: 10.1007/s11255-016-1373-1. Epub 2016 Jul 21.
5
Risk factors of infectious complications following flexible ureteroscope with a holmium laser: a retrospective study.钬激光软性输尿管镜术后感染性并发症的危险因素:一项回顾性研究
Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015 Jul 15;8(7):11252-9. eCollection 2015.
6
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.
7
The comparison of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery for stones larger than 2 cm in patients with a solitary kidney: a matched-pair analysis.单肾患者中微创经皮肾镜取石术与逆行肾内手术治疗直径大于2cm结石的比较:配对分析
World J Urol. 2015 Aug;33(8):1159-64. doi: 10.1007/s00345-014-1420-4. Epub 2014 Oct 21.
8
Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery, shockwave lithotripsy, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of medium-sized radiolucent renal stones.比较逆行性肾内手术、体外冲击波碎石术和经皮肾镜取石术治疗中等大小透光性肾结石。
World J Urol. 2013 Dec;31(6):1581-6. doi: 10.1007/s00345-012-0991-1. Epub 2012 Nov 22.
9
Prospective evaluation and classification of ureteral wall injuries resulting from insertion of a ureteral access sheath during retrograde intrarenal surgery.逆行性肾内手术中输尿管导入鞘插入导致的输尿管壁损伤的前瞻性评估和分类。
J Urol. 2013 Feb;189(2):580-4. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.197. Epub 2012 Oct 8.
10
Ureteropyeloscopic treatment of large, complex intrarenal and proximal ureteral calculi.经输尿管镜治疗大体积、复杂的肾内及上段输尿管结石。
BJU Int. 2013 Mar;111(3 Pt B):E127-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11352.x. Epub 2012 Jul 3.