• 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

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。

RIRS with FV-UAS vs. MPCNL for 2-3-cm upper urinary tract stones: a prospective study.

机构信息

The Affiliated Jiangning Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.

Nanjing Second Hospital, Nanjing, China.

出版信息

Urolithiasis. 2024 Feb 10;52(1):31. doi: 10.1007/s00240-024-01539-6.

DOI:10.1007/s00240-024-01539-6
PMID:38340165
Abstract

To observe the efficacy and safety of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) combined with flexible vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath (FV-UAS) and minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) in patients with 2-3 cm upper urinary tract stones. A total of 160 patients with 2-3 cm upper urinary tract stones were prospectively randomized into 2 groups-80 in the FV-UAS group and 80 cases as control in the MPCNL group. The stone-free rates (SFRs) at different times (postoperative 1st day and 4th week) were considered as the primary outcome of the study. The secondary end points were operative time, hemoglobin decrease, postoperative hospital stay, and operation-related complications. There was no obvious difference between the two groups in patient's demographics and preoperative clinical characteristics (all P > 0.05). Postoperative data showed that mean decrease in hemoglobin level was less in FV-UAS group than that in MPCNL group (5.3 vs. 10.8 g/L, P < 0.001). Postoperative hospital stay in FV-UAS group was more shorten than that in MPCNL group (2.7 vs. 4.9 days, P < 0.001). There was no statistical significance between the two groups in SFRs during postoperative 1st day and 4th week (both P > 0.05). However, in terms of the rates of bleeding and pain, MPCNL group were both significantly higher than FV-UAS group (6.2 vs. 0.0%, P = 0.023; 16.2 vs. 2.5%, P = 0.003; respectively). Our study showed that RIRS with FV-UAS, a new partnership to treat 2-3 cm upper urinary tract stones, was satisfying as it achieved a high SFR rate and a low rate of complications. This method was safe and reproducible in clinical practice.

摘要

观察逆行肾内手术(RIRS)联合柔性真空辅助输尿管进入鞘(FV-UAS)和微创经皮肾镜取石术(MPCNL)治疗 2-3cm 上尿路结石患者的疗效和安全性。将 160 例 2-3cm 上尿路结石患者前瞻性随机分为 2 组,FV-UAS 组 80 例,MPCNL 组 80 例。以术后第 1 天和第 4 周的结石清除率(SFR)作为主要研究终点。次要终点为手术时间、血红蛋白下降、术后住院时间和手术相关并发症。两组患者的人口统计学和术前临床特征无明显差异(均 P>0.05)。术后数据显示,FV-UAS 组血红蛋白水平下降均值低于 MPCNL 组(5.3 比 10.8g/L,P<0.001)。FV-UAS 组术后住院时间较 MPCNL 组缩短(2.7 比 4.9 天,P<0.001)。术后第 1 天和第 4 周两组 SFR 无统计学差异(均 P>0.05)。然而,在出血和疼痛发生率方面,MPCNL 组均显著高于 FV-UAS 组(6.2 比 0.0%,P=0.023;16.2 比 2.5%,P=0.003)。本研究表明,RIRS 联合 FV-UAS 治疗 2-3cm 上尿路结石疗效满意,结石清除率高,并发症发生率低。该方法在临床实践中安全且可重复。

相似文献

1
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.
2
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.
3
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.
4
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.
5
Comparative evaluation of the efficacy and safety of antegrade minimally percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery in the treatment of upper ureteral impacted stones: a retrospective cohort study.顺行微创经皮肾镜取石术与逆行肾内手术治疗输尿管上段嵌顿结石的疗效及安全性比较评估:一项回顾性队列研究
Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2025 Mar 28;97(1):13336. doi: 10.4081/aiua.2025.13336.
6
Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery in surgical management of upper urinary stones - A systematic review with meta-analysis.微创经皮肾镜取石术与逆行性肾内手术治疗上尿路结石的比较 - 系统评价与荟萃分析。
Int J Surg. 2019 Nov;71:1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.09.005. Epub 2019 Sep 12.
7
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.
8
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery Versus Miniaturized Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Kidney Stones >1cm: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials.逆行性肾内手术与小型化经皮肾镜取石术治疗直径>1cm肾结石的比较:随机试验的系统评价和荟萃分析
Eur Urol Focus. 2022 Jan;8(1):259-270. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.02.008. Epub 2021 Feb 21.
9
Efficacy and safety of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones (> 1 cm): a systematic review and meta-analysis of 18 randomized controlled trials.微创经皮肾镜取石术与逆行性肾内手术治疗上尿路结石(> 1cm)的疗效和安全性:18 项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
BMC Urol. 2023 Oct 24;23(1):171. doi: 10.1186/s12894-023-01341-3.
10
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.

引用本文的文献

1
A comparative study of flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath combined with single-use flexible ureteroscopes and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of kidney stones > 2.5 cm: a single-center retrospective study.可弯曲可导航输尿管吸引鞘联合一次性可弯曲输尿管镜与经皮肾镜取石术治疗直径>2.5 cm肾结石的对比研究:一项单中心回顾性研究
BMC Urol. 2025 Sep 2;25(1):226. doi: 10.1186/s12894-025-01930-4.
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

本文引用的文献

1
Comparison of vacuum suction ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy and traditional ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy for impacted upper ureteral stones.比较经皮肾镜取石术与传统输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗嵌顿性输尿管上段结石的疗效。
World J Urol. 2022 Sep;40(9):2347-2352. doi: 10.1007/s00345-022-04075-3. Epub 2022 Jul 18.
2
Novel Flexible Vacuum-Assisted Ureteral Access Sheath Can Actively Control Intrarenal Pressure and Obtain a Complete Stone-Free Status.新型柔性真空辅助输尿管通路鞘可有效控制肾内压力并实现结石完全清除状态。
J Endourol. 2022 Sep;36(9):1143-1148. doi: 10.1089/end.2022.0004. Epub 2022 Mar 25.
3
Natural History of Post-Treatment Kidney Stone Fragments: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
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.
4
Comparison of flexible ureteroscopic suction techniques: efficacy and safety of flexible and navigable access sheath (FANS) vs. direct in-scope suction (DISS) in the management of 2-3 cm lower pole renal stones.软性输尿管镜吸引技术的比较:软性可导航鞘(FANS)与直视下镜内吸引(DISS)在处理2-3厘米下极肾结石中的疗效与安全性
Urolithiasis. 2025 Apr 19;53(1):75. doi: 10.1007/s00240-025-01748-7.
5
Comparison of flexible ureteroscopy with flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotripsy for the treatment of impacted upper ureteral stones: a retrospective study.软性输尿管镜联合软性可导航输尿管吸引鞘与微创经皮肾镜取石术治疗上段输尿管嵌顿结石的疗效比较:一项回顾性研究
Front Surg. 2025 Mar 27;12:1562428. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2025.1562428. eCollection 2025.
6
Relocation of big stone fragments with direct-in scope suction.使用直视镜下吸引技术重新定位大的结石碎片。
World J Urol. 2025 Apr 3;43(1):210. doi: 10.1007/s00345-025-05594-5.
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
Impact of flow rate and ratio of endoscope-sheath diameter on stone removal in flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy: in vitro and CFD analyses insights.流速及内镜鞘直径比例对输尿管软镜碎石术结石清除率的影响:体外及计算流体动力学分析见解
Int Urol Nephrol. 2025 Feb 7. doi: 10.1007/s11255-025-04392-7.
9
Constructive feedback on the use of FV-UAS with RIRS for treating 2-3 cm upper urinary tract stones.关于使用FV-UAS联合逆行肾内手术治疗2-3厘米上尿路结石的建设性反馈。
Urolithiasis. 2025 Jan 9;53(1):21. doi: 10.1007/s00240-025-01692-6.
10
RIRS with FV-UAS vs. ESWL for the management of 1-2 cm lower pole renal calculi in obese patients: a prospective study.肥胖患者中,输尿管软镜联合钬激光碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗1-2厘米下极肾结石的前瞻性研究。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2024 Oct 30;11:1464491. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1464491. eCollection 2024.
治疗后肾结石碎片的自然史:系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Urol. 2021 Sep;206(3):526-538. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001836. Epub 2021 Apr 27.
4
Intrarenal Pressure: What Is Acceptable for Flexible Ureteroscopy and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy?肾内压:软性输尿管镜碎石术和经皮肾镜取石术可接受的范围是多少?
Eur Urol Focus. 2021 Jan;7(1):31-33. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.01.010. Epub 2021 Feb 3.
5
Comparison of Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Renal Pelvic Stones of 2-3 cm.2-3cm 肾盂结石的微创经皮肾镜取石术与逆行性肾内手术比较。
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2021 Jun;31(6):605-609. doi: 10.1089/lap.2020.0860. Epub 2020 Dec 14.
6
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.
7
Retrograde intrarenal surgery of renal stones: a critical multi-aspect evaluation of the outcomes by the Turkish Academy of Urology Prospective Study Group (ACUP Study).逆行性肾内手术治疗肾结石:土耳其泌尿外科协会前瞻性研究组(ACUP 研究)对结果的多方面批判性评估。
World J Urol. 2021 Feb;39(2):549-554. doi: 10.1007/s00345-020-03210-2. Epub 2020 Apr 28.
8
A simple fluid dynamic model of renal pelvis pressures during ureteroscopic kidney stone treatment.输尿管镜肾结石治疗期间肾盂压力的简单流体动力学模型。
PLoS One. 2018 Nov 29;13(11):e0208209. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208209. eCollection 2018.
9
External physical vibration lithecbole facilitating the expulsion of upper ureteric stones 1.0-2.0 cm after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a prospective randomized trial.体外物理振动松解辅助体外冲击波碎石术后排净输尿管上段 1.0-2.0cm 结石:一项前瞻性随机试验。
Urolithiasis. 2020 Feb;48(1):71-77. doi: 10.1007/s00240-018-1100-8. Epub 2018 Nov 28.
10
Comparison of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Methods For Management of Big- Sized Kidney Stones(? 4 cm): Single Center Retrospective Study.逆行性肾内手术与经皮肾镜取石术治疗大尺寸肾结石(≥4 cm)的比较:单中心回顾性研究
Urol J. 2019 Jun 17;16(3):232-235. doi: 10.22037/uj.v0i0.4072.