• 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

体外冲击波碎石术:治疗成功的可能预测因素的回顾性研究及重新探讨非增强计算机断层扫描在肾结石和输尿管结石病中的作用。

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: retrospective study on possible predictors of treatment success and revisiting the role of non-contrast-enhanced computer tomography in kidney and ureteral stone disease.

机构信息

Unidade Local de Saúde de Santo António, Porto, Portugal.

出版信息

Urolithiasis. 2024 Apr 17;52(1):65. doi: 10.1007/s00240-024-01570-7.

DOI:10.1007/s00240-024-01570-7
PMID:38630281
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11024041/
Abstract

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is a safe and efficient treatment option for urinary stone disease. The overall stone-free rate (SFR) varies significantly. This study aimed to assess the influence of stone size, location, stone density, and skin-to-stone distance (SSD), on the outcome of ESWL. We assessed whether pre-treatment non-contrast-enhanced CT scan (NCCT) confers significant advantages compared to kidney-ureter-bladder film (KUB) only. We reviewed the medical records of 307 cases (165 men, 142 women) with renal and ureteral stones treated consecutively at our institution with ESWL between 2020 and 2023. 44 of these underwent a NCCT. The outcome of ESWL was defined in two ways: visible stone fragmentation on KUB, and the need for further treatment. Overall success of fragmentation was 85% (261 patients). 61% of patients (n = 184) didn't need any further treatment. Stone size and location correlated significantly with treatment outcomes regarding the need for further treatment (p = 0.004) and stone fragmentation (p = 0.016), respectively. Unlike mean SSD (p = 0.462), the mean attenuation value (MAV) significantly correlated with the need for retreatment (p = 0.016). MAV seems to be a better predictor of treatment success (AUC of the ROC curve: 0.729), compared to stone size (AUC: 0.613). The difference between groups (with and without NCCT) in both treatment outcomes did not reach statistical significance. During decision-making, information regarding SSD and MAV can be useful in more dubious scenarios. However, it appears that their inclusion doesn't provide substantial advantages when compared to relying solely on KUB.

摘要

体外冲击波碎石术 (ESWL) 是治疗尿路结石病的一种安全有效的治疗方法。总的结石清除率 (SFR) 差异很大。本研究旨在评估结石大小、位置、结石密度和皮肤至结石距离 (SSD) 对 ESWL 结果的影响。我们评估了与仅进行肾脏输尿管膀胱平片 (KUB) 相比,治疗前非增强 CT 扫描 (NCCT) 是否具有显著优势。我们回顾了 2020 年至 2023 年在我们机构接受 ESWL 治疗的 307 例肾结石和输尿管结石连续病例的医疗记录(165 名男性,142 名女性),其中 44 例行 NCCT。ESWL 的结果通过两种方式定义:KUB 上可见的结石碎片和需要进一步治疗。结石碎裂的总体成功率为 85%(261 例患者)。61%的患者(n=184)无需进一步治疗。结石大小和位置与进一步治疗的需要(p=0.004)和结石碎裂(p=0.016)的治疗结果显著相关。与平均 SSD(p=0.462)不同,平均衰减值(MAV)与需要再次治疗显著相关(p=0.016)。与结石大小(AUC:0.613)相比,MAV 似乎是预测治疗成功的更好指标(ROC 曲线的 AUC:0.729)。在治疗结果方面,两组(有和无 NCCT)之间的差异没有达到统计学意义。在决策过程中,关于 SSD 和 MAV 的信息在更可疑的情况下可能会很有用。然而,与仅依赖 KUB 相比,它们的纳入似乎并没有提供实质性的优势。

相似文献

1
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: retrospective study on possible predictors of treatment success and revisiting the role of non-contrast-enhanced computer tomography in kidney and ureteral stone disease.体外冲击波碎石术:治疗成功的可能预测因素的回顾性研究及重新探讨非增强计算机断层扫描在肾结石和输尿管结石病中的作用。
Urolithiasis. 2024 Apr 17;52(1):65. doi: 10.1007/s00240-024-01570-7.
2
How do stone attenuation and skin-to-stone distance in computed tomography influence the performance of shock wave lithotripsy in ureteral stone disease?计算机断层扫描中的结石衰减和皮肤到结石的距离如何影响输尿管结石病中冲击波碎石术的疗效?
BMC Urol. 2015 Jul 23;15:72. doi: 10.1186/s12894-015-0069-7.
3
Can stone density on plain radiography predict the outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for ureteral stones?腹部平片上的结石密度能否预测输尿管结石体外冲击波碎石术的治疗效果?
Korean J Urol. 2015 Jan;56(1):56-62. doi: 10.4111/kju.2015.56.1.56. Epub 2015 Jan 6.
4
Advantages of the supine transgluteal approach for distal ureteral stone extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: outcomes based on CT characteristics.仰卧经臀肌入路用于输尿管下段结石体外冲击波碎石术的优势:基于CT特征的结果
Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2017 Apr;69(2):189-194. doi: 10.23736/S0393-2249.16.02741-7. Epub 2016 Oct 21.
5
Single extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy for proximal ureter stones: Can CT texture analysis technique help predict the therapeutic effect?单次体外冲击波碎石术治疗输尿管上段结石:CT 纹理分析技术能否帮助预测疗效?
Eur J Radiol. 2018 Oct;107:84-89. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.08.018. Epub 2018 Aug 23.
6
Evaluating the importance of mean stone density and skin-to-stone distance in predicting successful shock wave lithotripsy of renal and ureteric calculi.评估平均结石密度和皮肤至结石距离在预测肾和输尿管结石冲击波碎石术成功率中的重要性。
Urol Res. 2010 Aug;38(4):307-13. doi: 10.1007/s00240-010-0295-0. Epub 2010 Jul 13.
7
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy as first line treatment for urinary tract stones in children: outcome of 500 cases.体外冲击波碎石术作为儿童尿路结石的一线治疗方法:500 例病例的结果。
Int Urol Nephrol. 2012 Jun;44(3):661-6. doi: 10.1007/s11255-012-0133-0. Epub 2012 Feb 16.
8
Shock wave lithotripsy success for renal stones based on patient and stone computed tomography characteristics.基于患者和结石计算机断层扫描特征的肾结石冲击波碎石术成功率
Urology. 2007 Dec;70(6):1043-6; discussion 1046-7. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.07.074.
9
Factors affecting the success of pediatric extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy therapy: 26-year experience at a single institution.影响小儿体外冲击波碎石术治疗成功的因素:单机构 26 年经验。
Turk J Pediatr. 2020;62(1):68-79. doi: 10.24953/turkjped.2020.01.010.
10
Evaluation of computed tomography findings for success prediction after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for urinary tract stone disease.体外冲击波碎石术治疗尿路结石疾病后,通过计算机断层扫描结果评估成功预测情况。
Int Urol Nephrol. 2015 Jan;47(1):69-73. doi: 10.1007/s11255-014-0857-0. Epub 2014 Oct 14.

本文引用的文献

1
Safety and efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy vs. flexible ureteroscopy in the treatment of urinary calculi: A systematic review and meta-analysis.体外冲击波碎石术与软性输尿管镜检查治疗尿路结石的安全性和有效性:一项系统评价与荟萃分析
Front Surg. 2022 Nov 7;9:925481. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.925481. eCollection 2022.
2
The Efficiency of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (ESWL) in the Treatment of Distal Ureteral Stones: An Unjustly Forgotten Option?体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)治疗输尿管下段结石的疗效:一个被不公正遗忘的选择?
Cureus. 2022 Sep 1;14(9):e28671. doi: 10.7759/cureus.28671. eCollection 2022 Sep.
3
Can we successfully predict the outcome for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for medium size renal stones? A single-center experience.
我们能否成功预测体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)治疗中等大小肾结石的结果?单中心经验。
Urologia. 2022 May;89(2):235-239. doi: 10.1177/03915603211016355. Epub 2021 May 13.
4
Outcomes of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones according to ESWL intensity.根据体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)强度分析输尿管结石体外冲击波碎石术的治疗效果。
Transl Androl Urol. 2021 Apr;10(4):1588-1595. doi: 10.21037/tau-20-1397.
5
Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy: is it still valid in the era of robotic endourology? Can it be more efficient?体外冲击波碎石术:在机器人内镜泌尿外科时代,它仍然有效吗?它能更有效吗?
Curr Opin Urol. 2020 Mar;30(2):120-129. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000732.
6
Comparison of stone-free rates following shock wave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.比较冲击波碎石术、经皮肾镜取石术和逆行性肾内手术治疗肾结石的无石率:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。
PLoS One. 2019 Feb 21;14(2):e0211316. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211316. eCollection 2019.
7
Evaluating the importance of different computed tomography scan-based factors in predicting the outcome of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for renal stones.评估基于计算机断层扫描的不同因素对体外冲击波碎石术治疗肾结石效果的预测的重要性。
Investig Clin Urol. 2018 Jan;59(1):25-31. doi: 10.4111/icu.2018.59.1.25. Epub 2017 Dec 28.
8
Ureteral stenting can be a negative predictor for successful outcome following shock wave lithotripsy in patients with ureteral stones.输尿管支架置入可预测输尿管结石患者接受体外冲击波碎石术的治疗效果。
Investig Clin Urol. 2016 Nov;57(6):408-416. doi: 10.4111/icu.2016.57.6.408. Epub 2016 Oct 24.
9
Treatment of Renal Stones ≥20 mm with Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy.体外冲击波碎石术治疗直径≥20毫米的肾结石
Urol Int. 2016;96(1):99-105. doi: 10.1159/000441424. Epub 2015 Nov 10.
10
How do stone attenuation and skin-to-stone distance in computed tomography influence the performance of shock wave lithotripsy in ureteral stone disease?计算机断层扫描中的结石衰减和皮肤到结石的距离如何影响输尿管结石病中冲击波碎石术的疗效?
BMC Urol. 2015 Jul 23;15:72. doi: 10.1186/s12894-015-0069-7.