• 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

新冠疫情时代的冲击波碎石术

Shock wave lithotripsy in the era of COVID-19.

作者信息

Ibrahim Rabie M, Elzawy Faysal, Ragheb Ahmed Mohamed, Elmarakbi Akram A, Sayed Osama, Lotfy Amr M, Youssef Ahmed, Badwy Hany F, Mohamed Ahmed Gamal

机构信息

Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Beni-Suef University, Beni Suef, Egypt.

出版信息

Urol Ann. 2024 Jan-Mar;16(1):104-107. doi: 10.4103/ua.ua_42_22. Epub 2024 Jan 25.

DOI:10.4103/ua.ua_42_22
PMID:38415230
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10896331/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study y was to evaluate factors which can improve shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) results to keep up with COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Between June 2020 and June 2021, patients with radio-opaque or faint radio-opaque upper urinary tract stones, stone attenuation value ≤1200 HU, and stones size <2.5 cm were treated by electrohydraulic SWL. Patients with respiratory tract symptoms elevated temperature, contact with COVID-19 patients, or positive COVID-19 swab 2 weeks preoperatively, skin-to-stone distance >11 cm, and body mass index >30 kg/m were excluded from the study. Patients were prospectively enrolled in SWL done at a rate of 40-50 SWs/min under combined ultrasound and fluoroscopy-guided, ramped into high power in the 1 300 shocks. Success rate and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Five hundred and ninety patients completed the study. The success rate after 1 session was 408/590 patients (69.15%) which was augmented by 2 session to reach 527/590 patients 89.3%. The success rate was 96.2% at 3 months postoperatively. Most complications were mild (Grade 1 or 2).

CONCLUSIONS

SWL results improved using slow rate high power from the start of the session under combined fluoroscopy and ultrasound guidance. SWL may be a preferred option during a pandemic.

摘要

目的

本研究的目的是评估在新冠疫情期间可提高冲击波碎石术(SWL)效果的因素。

方法

2020年6月至2021年6月期间,对不透X线或轻度不透X线的上尿路结石、结石衰减值≤1200 HU且结石大小<2.5 cm的患者采用液电式SWL进行治疗。排除术前2周有呼吸道症状、体温升高、接触过新冠患者或新冠病毒拭子检测呈阳性、皮肤至结石距离>11 cm以及体重指数>30 kg/m²的患者。患者在超声和荧光透视联合引导下,以40 - 50次冲击波/分钟的频率前瞻性纳入SWL治疗,在1300次冲击中逐渐增加至高能量。记录成功率和并发症情况。

结果

590例患者完成了研究。单次治疗后的成功率为408/590例患者(69.15%),经二次治疗后成功率提高至527/590例患者(89.3%)。术后3个月成功率为96.2%。大多数并发症为轻度(1级或2级)。

结论

在荧光透视和超声联合引导下,从治疗开始就采用低频率高能量的方式可提高SWL的治疗效果。在疫情期间,SWL可能是一种首选的治疗方法。

相似文献

1
Shock wave lithotripsy in the era of COVID-19.新冠疫情时代的冲击波碎石术
Urol Ann. 2024 Jan-Mar;16(1):104-107. doi: 10.4103/ua.ua_42_22. Epub 2024 Jan 25.
2
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of large pediatric renal pelvic stone burden more than 2 cm.体外冲击波碎石术治疗 2cm 以上的儿童肾盂大结石负担。
J Pediatr Urol. 2023 Oct;19(5):561.e1-561.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2023.06.017. Epub 2023 Jun 20.
3
A new nomogram for prediction of outcome of pediatric shock-wave lithotripsy.一种用于预测儿童冲击波碎石术治疗结果的新列线图。
J Pediatr Urol. 2015 Apr;11(2):84.e1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2015.01.004. Epub 2015 Mar 5.
4
A Prospective Evaluation of High-Resolution CT Parameters in Predicting Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy Success for Upper Urinary Tract Calculi.高分辨率CT参数预测上尿路结石体外冲击波碎石术成功率的前瞻性评估
J Endourol. 2016 Nov;30(11):1227-1232. doi: 10.1089/end.2016.0364. Epub 2016 Oct 3.
5
Shock Wave Lithotripsy Outcomes for Upper and Lower Ureteral Stones in Non-obese and Non-Pre-stented Adults: Is One Session Sufficient?非肥胖且未预先放置支架的成年人上下段输尿管结石的冲击波碎石术结果:单次治疗是否足够?
Cureus. 2022 Sep 26;14(9):e29592. doi: 10.7759/cureus.29592. eCollection 2022 Sep.
6
Medical and surgical interventions for the treatment of urinary stones in children.儿童尿路结石治疗的医学及外科干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 2;6(6):CD010784. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010784.pub2.
7
Value of early second session shock wave lithotripsy in treatment of upper ureteric stones compared to laser ureteroscopy.早期二次冲击波碎石术治疗输尿管上段结石与激光输尿管镜比较的价值。
World J Urol. 2021 Aug;39(8):3089-3093. doi: 10.1007/s00345-020-03560-x. Epub 2021 Jan 20.
8
Stone attenuation and skin-to-stone distance on computed tomography predicts for stone fragmentation by shock wave lithotripsy.计算机断层扫描上的结石衰减和皮肤到结石的距离可预测冲击波碎石术导致的结石破碎情况。
Urology. 2008 Oct;72(4):765-9. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2008.05.046. Epub 2008 Jul 31.
9
Ultraslow full-power shock wave lithotripsy versus slow power-ramping shock wave lithotripsy in stones with high attenuation value: A randomized comparative study.超声慢能冲击碎石术与低强度实时跟踪冲击碎石术治疗高衰减结石的随机对照研究
Int J Urol. 2020 Feb;27(2):165-170. doi: 10.1111/iju.14158. Epub 2019 Dec 2.
10
Medical and surgical interventions for the treatment of urinary stones in children.治疗儿童尿路结石的医学和外科干预措施。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 9;10(10):CD010784. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010784.pub3.

本文引用的文献

1
What is the best way to manage ureteric calculi in the time of COVID-19? A comparison of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) and ureteroscopy (URS) in an Australian health-care setting.在新冠疫情期间,处理输尿管结石的最佳方法是什么?澳大利亚医疗环境下体外冲击波碎石术(SWL)与输尿管镜检查(URS)的比较。
BJUI Compass. 2020 Nov 7;2(2):92-96. doi: 10.1002/bco2.55. eCollection 2021 Mar.
2
Safety of "hot" and "cold" site admissions within a high-volume urology department in the United Kingdom at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic.在英国一家高流量泌尿外科部门,于新冠疫情高峰期“热区”和“冷区”收治患者的安全性。
BJUI Compass. 2021 Mar;2(2):97-104. doi: 10.1002/bco2.56. Epub 2021 Jan 21.
3
Value of early second session shock wave lithotripsy in treatment of upper ureteric stones compared to laser ureteroscopy.早期二次冲击波碎石术治疗输尿管上段结石与激光输尿管镜比较的价值。
World J Urol. 2021 Aug;39(8):3089-3093. doi: 10.1007/s00345-020-03560-x. Epub 2021 Jan 20.
4
Comparison of ultrasound-assisted and pure fluoroscopy-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for renal stones.超声辅助与纯透视引导体外冲击波碎石术治疗肾结石的比较。
BMC Urol. 2020 Nov 10;20(1):183. doi: 10.1186/s12894-020-00756-6.
5
We Asked the Experts: Covid-19 Outbreak: Is There Still a Place for Scheduled Surgery? "Reflection from Pathophysiological Data".我们向专家提问:新冠疫情:择期手术还有存在的空间吗?“基于病理生理数据的思考”
World J Surg. 2020 Jun;44(6):1695-1698. doi: 10.1007/s00268-020-05501-6.
6
Ultraslow full-power shock wave lithotripsy versus slow power-ramping shock wave lithotripsy in stones with high attenuation value: A randomized comparative study.超声慢能冲击碎石术与低强度实时跟踪冲击碎石术治疗高衰减结石的随机对照研究
Int J Urol. 2020 Feb;27(2):165-170. doi: 10.1111/iju.14158. Epub 2019 Dec 2.
7
Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy versus Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Upper Urinary Stones: A Systematic Review and 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:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:2035851. doi: 10.1155/2017/2035851. Epub 2017 May 3.
8
iPad-assisted percutaneous access to the kidney using marker-based navigation: initial clinical experience.使用基于标记的导航技术通过iPad辅助经皮肾穿刺:初步临床经验
Eur Urol. 2012 Mar;61(3):628-31. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.12.024. Epub 2011 Dec 21.
9
Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses.使用 G*Power 3.1 进行统计功效分析:相关和回归分析的检验。
Behav Res Methods. 2009 Nov;41(4):1149-60. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149.
10
Renal injury during shock wave lithotripsy is significantly reduced by slowing the rate of shock wave delivery.通过减慢冲击波释放的速率,可显著降低冲击波碎石术期间的肾损伤。
BJU Int. 2007 Sep;100(3):624-7; discussion 627-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07007.x. Epub 2007 Jun 5.