• 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

经皮肾镜碎石取石术中单次扩张与传统序贯扩张的可行性和安全性比较:一项前瞻性随机对照研究。

The feasibility and safety of one-shot dilatation compared to conventional sequential dilatation in tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective randomized controlled study.

机构信息

Department of Urology, Cairo University Hospitals, Cairo, Egypt.

出版信息

Urolithiasis. 2022 Dec 1;51(1):3. doi: 10.1007/s00240-022-01383-6.

DOI:10.1007/s00240-022-01383-6
PMID:36454345
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9715517/
Abstract

To study the feasibility and safety of One-Shot Dilatation (OSD), versus serial sequential dilatation in tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL). One Hundred and Fifty patients were randomised into two groups; Group A (One-Shot Dilatation), Group B (Serial Dilatation). Twenty-one patients were excluded from the study. Detailed history was taken and full physical examination was performed. Pre-operative routine laboratory investigations were done. Also, non-contrast Computed Tomography of the Urinary Tract (CTUT) and plain urinary tract x-ray were done. Intra-operative assessments of dilatation, total operative, total fluoroscopy and fluoroscopy during dilatation durations were recorded, as well as estimated blood loss. Post-operatively haemoglobin, creatinine levels and CTUT were performed for all patients. Complications, as urinary leakage time, analgesic requirements and hospitalization time were measured. There were statistically significant differences in the intraoperative durations, where Group A had shorter dilatation time, fluoroscopy time during dilatation and total operative time. Group B had a higher complications rate than Group A; 37.9%, 11.3%, respectively. Also, Group B showed haemoglobin drop by 0.44 mg/dl higher than Group A. More doses of analgesia were required for Group B. Hospitalization time and rate of urinary leakage were both in favour of Group A. For patients undergoing Tubeless PCNL, we have concluded that one-shot dilatation seems to be a safer and more feasible technique than Serial dilatation.

摘要

研究单次扩张(OSD)与无管经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)中连续序贯扩张的可行性和安全性。将 150 名患者随机分为两组;A 组(单次扩张),B 组(连续扩张)。21 名患者被排除在研究之外。详细的病史采集和全面的体格检查。进行了术前常规实验室检查。还进行了尿路非增强计算机断层扫描(CTUT)和普通尿路 X 线检查。记录了术中扩张、总手术、总透视和扩张期间透视的评估,以及估计的失血量。所有患者均行术后血红蛋白、肌酐水平和 CTUT 检查。测量了并发症,如尿漏时间、镇痛需求和住院时间。术中持续时间存在统计学显著差异,A 组的扩张时间、扩张期间透视时间和总手术时间更短。B 组的并发症发生率高于 A 组;分别为 37.9%和 11.3%。此外,B 组的血红蛋白下降比 A 组高 0.44mg/dl。B 组需要更多剂量的镇痛药。住院时间和尿漏率均有利于 A 组。对于接受无管 PCNL 的患者,我们得出结论,单次扩张似乎比连续扩张更安全、更可行。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/261a/9715517/b1d508a53f27/240_2022_1383_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/261a/9715517/b1d508a53f27/240_2022_1383_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/261a/9715517/b1d508a53f27/240_2022_1383_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
The feasibility and safety of one-shot dilatation compared to conventional sequential dilatation in tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective randomized controlled study.经皮肾镜碎石取石术中单次扩张与传统序贯扩张的可行性和安全性比较:一项前瞻性随机对照研究。
Urolithiasis. 2022 Dec 1;51(1):3. doi: 10.1007/s00240-022-01383-6.
2
One-shot dilation versus serial dilation technique for access in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.单次扩张与连续扩张技术在经皮肾镜取石术中的应用:系统评价和荟萃分析。
BMJ Open. 2019 Apr 20;9(4):e025871. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025871.
3
Chinese One-shot Dilation versus Sequential Fascial Dilation for Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Feasibility Study and Comparison.经皮肾镜取石术中单次扩张与序贯筋膜扩张的对比:一项可行性研究与比较
Urol J. 2019 Feb 21;16(1):21-26. doi: 10.22037/uj.v16i1.4610.
4
Single step track dilatation for percutaneous nephrolithotomy in children.经皮肾镜取石术中的单步轨道扩张。
Int Urol Nephrol. 2022 Nov;54(11):2789-2795. doi: 10.1007/s11255-022-03314-1. Epub 2022 Aug 8.
5
Comparison of safety and efficacy of one shot dilation vs. gradual dilation technique in supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy.仰卧位经皮肾镜取石术中单次扩张与逐渐扩张技术的安全性和疗效比较。
World J Urol. 2023 Jun;41(6):1659-1666. doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04393-0. Epub 2023 Apr 11.
6
One-Shot Dilatation Metal Dilator During Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Flank-Free Supine Position: A Randomized Controlled Study.单次扩张法在侧卧位无俯卧位经皮肾镜取石术中应用金属扩张器:一项随机对照研究。
J Endourol. 2022 Jun;36(6):727-733. doi: 10.1089/end.2021.0378.
7
One-shot dilation in modified supine position for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: experience from over 300 cases.改良仰卧位单次扩张用于经皮肾镜取石术:300余例经验
Urol J. 2014 Jul 8;11(3):1575-82.
8
A prospective randomized study comparing the four tract dilation methods of percutaneous nephrolithotomy.一项比较经皮肾镜取石术四种通道扩张方法的前瞻性随机研究。
World J Urol. 2017 May;35(5):803-807. doi: 10.1007/s00345-016-1929-9. Epub 2016 Sep 10.
9
Comparison of the safety and efficacy of one-shot and telescopic metal dilatation in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a randomized controlled trial.经皮肾镜取石术中单次金属扩张与套叠式金属扩张的安全性和有效性比较:一项随机对照试验
Urolithiasis. 2014 Jun;42(3):269-73. doi: 10.1007/s00240-014-0644-5. Epub 2014 Feb 16.
10
A comparison among four tract dilation methods of percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.四种经皮肾镜取石术通道扩张方法的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Urolithiasis. 2013 Nov;41(6):523-30. doi: 10.1007/s00240-013-0598-z. Epub 2013 Aug 23.

引用本文的文献

1
Clinical analysis of ultrasound-guided "tract without bleeding vessel requiring embolization (TBVE)" in reducing bleeding during percutaneous nephrolithotomy.超声引导下“无出血血管需栓塞的通道(TBVE)”在经皮肾镜取石术中减少出血的临床分析
BMC Urol. 2025 Aug 7;25(1):192. doi: 10.1186/s12894-025-01891-8.
2
Comparison of two different tract dilatation techniques in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Amplatz versus balloon.经皮肾镜取石术中两种不同通道扩张技术的比较:Amplatz扩张器与球囊扩张器。
Urolithiasis. 2025 Jun 21;53(1):123. doi: 10.1007/s00240-025-01800-6.

本文引用的文献

1
The comparative analysis of the three dilatation techniques in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Which one is safer?经皮肾镜取石术中三种扩张技术的比较分析:哪一种更安全?
Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2019 Oct 2;91(3). doi: 10.4081/aiua.2019.3.171.
2
One-shot dilation versus serial dilation technique for access in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.单次扩张与连续扩张技术在经皮肾镜取石术中的应用:系统评价和荟萃分析。
BMJ Open. 2019 Apr 20;9(4):e025871. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025871.
3
Learning Curves in Urolithiasis Surgery: A Systematic Review.
结石病手术学习曲线:系统评价。
J Endourol. 2018 Nov;32(11):1008-1020. doi: 10.1089/end.2018.0425.
4
Tubeless versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an update meta-analysis.无管化与标准经皮肾镜取石术:一项更新的荟萃分析。
BMC Urol. 2017 Nov 13;17(1):102. doi: 10.1186/s12894-017-0295-2.
5
Intraoperative and postoperative feasibility and safety of total tubeless, tubeless, small-bore tube, and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of 16 randomized controlled trials.全无管、无管、小口径造瘘管及标准经皮肾镜取石术的术中及术后可行性与安全性:一项对16项随机对照试验的系统评价和网状Meta分析
BMC Urol. 2017 Jun 27;17(1):48. doi: 10.1186/s12894-017-0239-x.
6
Can We Use Single-step Dilation as a Safe Alternative Dilation Method in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy?在经皮肾镜取石术中,我们能否将一步扩张作为一种安全的替代扩张方法?
Urology. 2017 Jan;99:38-41. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2016.09.014. Epub 2016 Sep 22.
7
A prospective randomized study comparing the four tract dilation methods of percutaneous nephrolithotomy.一项比较经皮肾镜取石术四种通道扩张方法的前瞻性随机研究。
World J Urol. 2017 May;35(5):803-807. doi: 10.1007/s00345-016-1929-9. Epub 2016 Sep 10.
8
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.
9
Single-step renal dilatation in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A prospective randomised study.经皮肾镜取石术中的单步肾扩张:一项前瞻性随机研究。
Arab J Urol. 2014 Sep;12(3):219-22. doi: 10.1016/j.aju.2014.06.001. Epub 2014 Jul 2.
10
Complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy.经皮肾镜取石术的并发症
World J Urol. 2015 Aug;33(8):1069-77. doi: 10.1007/s00345-014-1400-8. Epub 2014 Sep 14.