• 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

迷你通道、迷你肾镜及迷你超声探头经皮肾镜取石术治疗1.5 - 2.5厘米肾结石的疗效与安全性

[Efficacy and safety of mini-track, mini-nephroscopy and mini-ultrasonic probe percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of 1.5-2.5 cm kidney stones].

作者信息

Wang Mingrui, Liu Jun, Xiong Liulin, Yu Luping, Hu Hao, Xu Kexin, Xu Tao

机构信息

Department of Urology, Peking University People's Hospital; The Institute of Applied Lithotripsy Technology, Peking University, Beijing 100044, China.

出版信息

Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2024 Aug 18;56(4):605-609. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2024.04.010.

DOI:10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2024.04.010
PMID:39041553
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11284484/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of mini-track, mini-nephroscopy and mini-ultrasonic probe percutaneous nephrolithotomy (3mPCNL) for the treatment of 1.5-2.5 cm kidney stones.

METHODS

The perioperative data and postoperative follow-up data of a total of 25 patients with about 1.5-2.5 cm kidney stones who underwent 3mPCNL under ultrasound guidance in Peking University People's Hospital from November 2023 to January 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. During the matching period, the 25 patients with 1.5-2.5 cm kidney stones receiving standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (sPCNL) were matched one-to-one according to the criterion that the absolute difference of the maximum diameter of stones between the two groups was less than 1 mm. The operative time, renal function changes, postoperative stone-free rate, hemoglobin changes, and complication rate of the two treatments were compared, and then the effectiveness and safety of 3mPCNL were preliminarily analyzed.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in mean age, preoperative median creatinine, preoperative mean hemoglobin, preoperative mean hematocrit, median stone maximum diameter, and median stone CT density between the 3mPCNL group and the sPCNL group. The median operation time in the 3mPCNL group was 60.0 (45.0-110.0) min, with no statistical significance compared with the sPCNL group, and all the patients underwent single-channel operations. The mean hemoglobin after operation in the 3mPCNL group was (115.3±15.5) mmol/L, and there was no significant difference between the preoperative group and the sPCNL group, and the mean hemoglobin decreased significantly between the sPCNL group and the sPCNL group [(9.5±2.2) mmol/L . (10.1±1.9) mmol/L]. The mean hematocrit after operation was (28.0±5.2)%, and the difference was statistically significant compared with that before operation (=2.414, =0.020). The mean hematocrit drop was not statistically signi-ficant compared with the sPCNL group (2.3% . 2.7%). The median serum creatinine in the 3mPCNL group was 74.0 (51.0-118.0) μmol/L after operation, and the difference was statistically significant compared with that before operation (=-2.980, =0.005). The stone-free rate in the 3mPCNL group and the sPCNL group was 96.0% and 97.3%, respectively, and the mean hospital stay was (4.3± 1.4) d and (5.5±2.0) d, respectively, with the statistical significance (=0.192, =0.025). After the operation, one patient in sPCNL group had massive hemorrhage after the nephrostomy tube was removed, which was improved after selective renal artery embolization. One patient in the 3mPCNL group developed mild perirenal hematoma, which was improved after conservative treatment, and no complications were observed in the other patients.

CONCLUSION

3mPCNL in the treatment of 1.5-2.5 cm kidney stones can achieve an effective rate comparable to sPCNL, and can achieve the ideal stone-free rate in a shorter operative time with a lower rate of surgery-related complications.

摘要

目的

探讨微通道、微肾镜联合微超声探头经皮肾镜取石术(3mPCNL)治疗1.5 - 2.5 cm肾结石的疗效及安全性。

方法

回顾性分析2023年11月至2024年1月在北京大学人民医院接受超声引导下3mPCNL治疗的25例直径约1.5 - 2.5 cm肾结石患者的围手术期数据及术后随访数据。在匹配期,将25例接受标准经皮肾镜取石术(sPCNL)的1.5 - 2.5 cm肾结石患者按照两组结石最大直径绝对差值小于1 mm的标准进行一对一匹配。比较两种治疗方法的手术时间、肾功能变化、术后结石清除率、血红蛋白变化及并发症发生率,进而初步分析3mPCNL的有效性及安全性。

结果

3mPCNL组与sPCNL组在平均年龄、术前肌酐中位数、术前平均血红蛋白、术前平均血细胞比容、结石最大直径中位数及结石CT密度中位数方面差异均无统计学意义。3mPCNL组的中位手术时间为60.0(45.0 - 110.0)min,与sPCNL组相比无统计学意义,且所有患者均行单通道手术。3mPCNL组术后平均血红蛋白为(115.3±15.5)mmol/L,与术前组及sPCNL组相比差异均无统计学意义,而sPCNL组术后平均血红蛋白较术前明显下降[(9.5±2.2)mmol/L. (10.1±1.9)mmol/L]。术后平均血细胞比容为(28.0±5.2)%,与术前相比差异有统计学意义(=2.414,=0.020)。与sPCNL组相比,平均血细胞比容下降差异无统计学意义(2.3%. 2.7%)。3mPCNL组术后血清肌酐中位数为74.0(51.0 - 118.0)μmol/L,与术前相比差异有统计学意义(=-2.980,=0.005)。3mPCNL组和sPCNL组的结石清除率分别为96.0%和97.3%,平均住院时间分别为(4.3±1.4)d和(5.5±2.0)d,差异有统计学意义(=0.192,=0.025)。术后,sPCNL组1例患者在拔除肾造瘘管后发生大出血,经选择性肾动脉栓塞术后好转。3mPCNL组1例患者出现轻度肾周血肿,经保守治疗后好转,其他患者未观察到并发症。

结论

3mPCNL治疗1.5 - 2.5 cm肾结石可获得与sPCNL相当的有效率,且能在更短手术时间内达到理想的结石清除率,手术相关并发症发生率更低。

相似文献

1
[Efficacy and safety of mini-track, mini-nephroscopy and mini-ultrasonic probe percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of 1.5-2.5 cm kidney stones].迷你通道、迷你肾镜及迷你超声探头经皮肾镜取石术治疗1.5 - 2.5厘米肾结石的疗效与安全性
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2024 Aug 18;56(4):605-609. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2024.04.010.
2
Mini- versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of pediatric renal stones: is smaller enough?微通道与标准经皮肾镜碎石术治疗小儿肾结石:更小就是更好吗?
J Pediatr Urol. 2019 Dec;15(6):664.e1-664.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2019.09.009. Epub 2019 Sep 16.
3
Mini-track, mini-nephroscopy, mini-ultrasonic probe percutaneous nephrolithotomy and its initial clinical application.微通道、微经皮肾镜、微超声探针经皮肾镜取石术及其初步临床应用。
BMC Urol. 2022 Sep 7;22(1):144. doi: 10.1186/s12894-022-01061-0.
4
Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs standard PCNL for management of renal stones in the flank-free modified supine position: single-center experience.无侧卧位改良仰卧位下微创经皮肾镜取石术与标准经皮肾镜取石术治疗肾结石:单中心经验。
Urolithiasis. 2017 Dec;45(6):585-589. doi: 10.1007/s00240-017-0966-1. Epub 2017 Feb 22.
5
Is percutaneous nephrolithotomy effective and safe in infants younger than 2 Years old? Comparison of mini standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy.经皮肾镜碎石术在 2 岁以下婴儿中是否有效且安全?迷你标准经皮肾镜碎石术的比较。
J Pediatr Urol. 2024 Jun;20(3):402.e1-402.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2023.12.004. Epub 2023 Dec 14.
6
[Long-term analysis of safety and efficacy of standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with solitary kidneys].[标准经皮肾镜取石术治疗孤立肾患者安全性和有效性的长期分析]
Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2020 Aug 18;52(4):663-666. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2020.04.012.
7
Mini vs standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones: a comparative study.微通道与标准经皮肾镜取石术治疗肾结石:一项对照研究。
Urolithiasis. 2019 Apr;47(2):207-214. doi: 10.1007/s00240-018-1055-9. Epub 2018 Mar 16.
8
Comparison of renal pelvic pressure and postoperative fever incidence between standard- and mini-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy.标准通道与微通道经皮肾镜取石术肾盂压力及术后发热发生率的比较
Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2017 Jan;33(1):36-43. doi: 10.1016/j.kjms.2016.10.012. Epub 2016 Dec 22.
9
Comparison of two percutaneous nephrolithotomy methods for the treatment of pediatric kidney stones: mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy.两种经皮肾镜取石术治疗小儿肾结石的比较:微经皮肾镜取石术与标准经皮肾镜取石术。
Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2024 May 6;96(2):12369. doi: 10.4081/aiua.2024.12369.
10
Mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the management of renal stones over 2 cm: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.微创经皮肾镜取石术与标准经皮肾镜取石术治疗 2cm 以上肾结石:系统评价和随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
Minerva Urol Nephrol. 2022 Aug;74(4):409-417. doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.22.04678-X. Epub 2022 Feb 11.

本文引用的文献

1
Tubeless PCNL versus standard PCNL for the treatment of upper urinary tract stones: a propensity score matching analysis.无管化经皮肾镜取石术与标准经皮肾镜取石术治疗上尿路结石:倾向评分匹配分析。
Int Urol Nephrol. 2024 Apr;56(4):1281-1288. doi: 10.1007/s11255-023-03872-y. Epub 2023 Nov 21.
2
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones.体外冲击波碎石术 (ESWL) 与经皮肾镜碎石取石术 (PCNL) 或逆行肾内手术 (RIRS) 治疗肾结石的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Aug 1;8(8):CD007044. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007044.pub4.
3
Efficacy and safety of the surgical treatments for lower calyceal stones: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.下盏结石的外科治疗的疗效和安全性:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。
Int J Surg. 2023 Mar 1;109(3):383-388. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000062.
4
The genetics of kidney stone disease and nephrocalcinosis.肾结石病和肾钙质沉着症的遗传学
Nat Rev Nephrol. 2022 Apr;18(4):224-240. doi: 10.1038/s41581-021-00513-4. Epub 2021 Dec 14.
5
Intraoperative and postoperative surgical complications after ureteroscopy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review.经输尿管镜检查术、逆行性肾内手术和经皮肾镜取石术治疗后的术中及术后手术并发症:系统评价。
Minerva Urol Nephrol. 2021 Jun;73(3):309-332. doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.21.04294-4. Epub 2021 Apr 22.
6
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.
7
Does Miniaturization Actually Decrease Bleeding After Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy? A Single-Center Randomized Trial.经皮肾镜碎石取石术后微型化是否真的减少出血?一项单中心随机试验。
J Endourol. 2021 Apr;35(4):451-456. doi: 10.1089/end.2020.0533. Epub 2021 Jan 29.
8
Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL): Techniques and outcomes.微创经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL):技术与结果
Turk J Urol. 2020 Nov;46(Supp. 1):S58-S63. doi: 10.5152/tud.2020.20161. Epub 2020 Jun 5.
9
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.
10
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.