Suppr超能文献

经皮肾镜碎石术与逆行性肾内手术的结石清除率比较。

Comparison of stone-free rate between percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery.

机构信息

Department of Urology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.

Department of Urology, College of Medicine and Shu-Tien Urological Research Center, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.

出版信息

J Chin Med Assoc. 2023 May 1;86(5):485-488. doi: 10.1097/JCMA.0000000000000913. Epub 2023 Mar 13.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The management of urolithiasis in the kidney has been drastically changed in the era of endourology, mainly consisting of three surgical procedures: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Since ESWL is usually less invasive via ambulatory clinic routes, this study aimed to examine the stone-free rate (SFR) between PCNL and RIRS.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who had renal stones and were treated with either PCNL or RIRS from June 2016 to June 2018. Staghorn stones, stones with diameters <1 cm, and stones with diameters >2 cm were excluded. Patients who underwent multiple surgeries for bilateral renal stones and those with graft kidney stones were excluded from the study. X-ray, sonography, and/or computed tomography (CT) were used to calculate the size of the stones. Follow-up was evaluated by the same image examination within three months after surgery. Stone-free was defined as no residual stone or the presence of asymptomatic calculi <4 mm. The operation time was defined as a skin-to-skin interval.

RESULTS

Following exclusion criteria, there were 39 patients in each arm, with no difference in age, sex, or any other demographic data. The average stone size in the PCNL and RIRS groups was 16.3 and 14.0 mm, respectively ( p = 0.009). There was no significant difference in SFR (71.8% vs 61.5%, p = 0.337); the operation time was significant longer ( p < 0.001), and the hospital stay was significantly shorter ( p < 0.001) in the RIRS group.

CONCLUSION

PCNL and RIRS are both feasible options for managing kidney stones. However, the initial stone size might affect the selection of operation. The SFR in the PCNL group was numerically but not statistically higher. The RIRS group, on the other hand, had a longer operation time but a shorter hospital stays.

摘要

背景

在腔内泌尿外科时代,肾结石的治疗方法发生了重大变化,主要包括三种手术方式:体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)、经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)和逆行肾内手术(RIRS)。由于 ESWL 通常通过门诊途径进行,创伤较小,因此本研究旨在检查 PCNL 和 RIRS 的结石清除率(SFR)。

方法

我们回顾性分析了 2016 年 6 月至 2018 年 6 月期间接受 PCNL 或 RIRS 治疗的肾结石患者。排除鹿角结石、直径<1cm 的结石和直径>2cm 的结石。排除双侧肾结石多次手术和移植肾结石的患者。X 线、超声和/或计算机断层扫描(CT)用于计算结石大小。术后三个月通过相同的影像学检查进行随访。结石清除定义为无残留结石或存在无症状结石<4mm。手术时间定义为皮肤到皮肤的间隔。

结果

排除标准后,每组各有 39 例患者,年龄、性别或其他任何人口统计学数据无差异。PCNL 和 RIRS 组的平均结石大小分别为 16.3mm 和 14.0mm(p=0.009)。SFR 无显著差异(71.8% vs 61.5%,p=0.337);RIRS 组手术时间明显较长(p<0.001),住院时间明显较短(p<0.001)。

结论

PCNL 和 RIRS 都是治疗肾结石的可行选择。然而,初始结石大小可能会影响手术选择。PCNL 组的 SFR 虽然略高,但无统计学意义。另一方面,RIRS 组的手术时间较长,但住院时间较短。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验