• 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

逆行性肾内手术与超声引导下冲击波碎石术治疗1至2厘米透X线的下盏结石的对比研究

Comparative study between retrograde intrarenal surgery and ultrasound- guided shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of 1 to 2 cm radiolucent lower calyceal stones.

作者信息

Elal Ashraf M Abd, Shaher Hussein, El-Barky Ehab, Ali Saad, Omar Rabea Gomaa

机构信息

Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Benha University, Benha, Egypt.

出版信息

Urol Ann. 2024 Jul-Sep;16(3):185-191. doi: 10.4103/ua.ua_5_24. Epub 2024 Jun 10.

DOI:10.4103/ua.ua_5_24
PMID:39290222
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11404710/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The objective is to compare the safety and efficacy of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and ultrasound-guided (US-guided) shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) for the treatment of radiolucent lower pole calculi of 1-2 cm.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective randomized study was performed at our tertiary care urology institute of Benha University Hospitals; cases were randomized either to undergo RIRS (Group A) or US-guided SWL with a triple focus system (Group B). The safety and effectiveness of both therapies were compared using new criteria for stone-free rate (SFR): Grade A (absolutely stone free), Grade B (≤2 mm fragments), and Grade C (>2 mm up to 4 mm fragments), fluoroscopy time, operative time, auxiliary procedures, retreatment, and complications.

RESULTS

Out of 100 patients, 92 were eligible for this study. RIRS had a higher SFR of 88.9% compared to SWL, 72.3% ( = 0.045). Furthermore, stone-free classification significantly differed between the studied groups ( < 0.001), with Grade A being significantly higher in Group A. Conversely, Grades B and C were lower in Group A. On the other hand, operative and fluoroscopy times were significantly reduced with SWL ( = 0.004 and < 0.001, respectively). While complications did not significantly differ between the two groups ( = 0.340), a significant distinction was observed in terms of the Clavien-Dindo classification.

CONCLUSIONS

RIRS is an effective and safe option for treating radiolucent lower calyceal stones of ≤2 cm, with a greater SFR and lower need for auxiliary operations. However, Sono SWL is a cost-effective alternative that can achieve a comparable success rate after retreatment sessions.

摘要

目的

比较逆行肾内手术(RIRS)和超声引导(US引导)冲击波碎石术(SWL)治疗1-2cm透光性下极结石的安全性和有效性。

材料与方法

本前瞻性随机研究在本哈大学医院三级泌尿外科机构进行;病例随机分为接受RIRS治疗组(A组)或采用三焦点系统的US引导SWL治疗组(B组)。使用结石清除率(SFR)的新标准比较两种治疗方法的安全性和有效性:A级(结石完全清除)、B级(≤2mm碎片)和C级(>2mm至4mm碎片)、透视时间、手术时间、辅助操作、再次治疗和并发症。

结果

100例患者中,92例符合本研究条件。与SWL的72.3%相比,RIRS的SFR更高,为88.9%(P=0.045)。此外,研究组之间的结石清除分类有显著差异(P<0.001),A组的A级明显更高。相反,A组的B级和C级较低。另一方面,SWL的手术和透视时间显著缩短(分别为P=0.004和P<0.001)。虽然两组之间的并发症无显著差异(P=0.340),但在Clavien-Dindo分类方面观察到显著差异。

结论

RIRS是治疗≤2cm透光性下盏结石的有效且安全的选择,结石清除率更高,辅助手术需求更低。然而,超声SWL是一种具有成本效益的替代方法,在再次治疗后可获得相当的成功率。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5da8/11404710/371d5c20a784/UA-16-185-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5da8/11404710/b51cf4cb835a/UA-16-185-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5da8/11404710/0ea3f0342f6f/UA-16-185-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5da8/11404710/371d5c20a784/UA-16-185-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5da8/11404710/b51cf4cb835a/UA-16-185-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5da8/11404710/0ea3f0342f6f/UA-16-185-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5da8/11404710/371d5c20a784/UA-16-185-g003.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparative study between retrograde intrarenal surgery and ultrasound- guided shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of 1 to 2 cm radiolucent lower calyceal stones.逆行性肾内手术与超声引导下冲击波碎石术治疗1至2厘米透X线的下盏结石的对比研究
Urol Ann. 2024 Jul-Sep;16(3):185-191. doi: 10.4103/ua.ua_5_24. Epub 2024 Jun 10.
2
The best treatment approach for lower calyceal stones ≤20 mm in maximal diameter: mini percutaneous nephrolithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery or shock wave lithotripsy. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature conducted by the European Section of Uro-Technology and Young Academic Urologists.对于最大直径≤20 毫米的下盏结石,最佳治疗方法是:微创经皮肾镜碎石术、逆行肾内手术或体外冲击波碎石术。由欧洲泌尿外科技术分会和青年泌尿外科医生进行的系统评价和文献荟萃分析。
Minerva Urol Nephrol. 2021 Dec;73(6):711-723. doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.21.04388-3. Epub 2021 Jun 22.
3
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.
4
A prospective, randomized comparison of shock wave lithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery and miniperc for treatment of 1 to 2 cm radiolucent lower calyceal renal calculi: a single center experience.一项前瞻性、随机对照研究比较了冲击波碎石术、逆行肾内手术和 miniperc 治疗 1 至 2cm 透光性下盏肾结石:单中心经验。
J Urol. 2015 Jan;193(1):160-4. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2014.07.088. Epub 2014 Jul 24.
5
Comparison between retrograde intrarenal surgery and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of lower pole kidney stones up to 15 mm. Prospective, randomized study.逆行性肾内手术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗直径达15毫米的下极肾结石的比较。前瞻性随机研究。
Actas Urol Esp. 2015 May;39(4):236-42. doi: 10.1016/j.acuro.2014.08.003. Epub 2014 Nov 28.
6
Which is the best treatment of pediatric upper urinary tract stones among extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review.体外冲击波碎石术、经皮肾镜取石术和逆行性肾内手术治疗小儿上尿路结石的最佳治疗方法:系统评价。
BMC Urol. 2019 Oct 23;19(1):98. doi: 10.1186/s12894-019-0520-2.
7
Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery, shockwave lithotripsy, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of medium-sized radiolucent renal stones.比较逆行性肾内手术、体外冲击波碎石术和经皮肾镜取石术治疗中等大小透光性肾结石。
World J Urol. 2013 Dec;31(6):1581-6. doi: 10.1007/s00345-012-0991-1. Epub 2012 Nov 22.
8
Retrograde intrarenal surgery vs extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for intermediate size inferior pole calculi: a prospective assessment of objective and subjective outcomes.逆行肾内手术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗中等大小下极结石:客观和主观结局的前瞻性评估。
Urology. 2014 May;83(5):1016-22. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.12.026. Epub 2014 Feb 21.
9
Flexible Ureterorenoscopy Versus Shockwave Lithotripsy for Kidney Stones ≤2 cm: A Randomized Controlled Trial.≤2厘米肾结石的软性输尿管肾镜检查与冲击波碎石术:一项随机对照试验
Eur Urol Focus. 2022 Nov;8(6):1816-1822. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.04.004. Epub 2022 Apr 22.
10
Effectiveness of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy, Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery, and Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Treatment of Renal Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.经皮肾镜取石术、逆行性肾内手术及体外冲击波碎石术治疗肾结石的有效性:一项系统评价与荟萃分析
Medicina (Kaunas). 2020 Dec 30;57(1):26. doi: 10.3390/medicina57010026.

引用本文的文献

1
Reporting the Impact of Pelvicalyceal System (PCS) Anatomy on Clinical Outcomes in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS) Studies: Can We Do Better? - Methodological Review from the Section of EAU Endourology.报告肾盂肾盏系统(PCS)解剖结构对逆行性肾内手术(RIRS)研究临床结果的影响:我们能否做得更好?——欧洲泌尿外科学会(EAU)腔内泌尿外科分会的方法学综述
Urol Res Pract. 2025 May 21;51(1):12-21. doi: 10.5152/tud.2025.25032.

本文引用的文献

1
Retrograde intrarenal surgery for lower pole stones utilizing stone displacement technique yields excellent results.采用结石移位技术的逆行性肾内手术治疗下极结石效果极佳。
Asian J Urol. 2023 Jan;10(1):58-63. doi: 10.1016/j.ajur.2021.09.001. Epub 2021 Sep 10.
2
The best treatment approach for lower calyceal stones ≤20 mm in maximal diameter: mini percutaneous nephrolithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery or shock wave lithotripsy. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature conducted by the European Section of Uro-Technology and Young Academic Urologists.对于最大直径≤20 毫米的下盏结石,最佳治疗方法是:微创经皮肾镜碎石术、逆行肾内手术或体外冲击波碎石术。由欧洲泌尿外科技术分会和青年泌尿外科医生进行的系统评价和文献荟萃分析。
Minerva Urol Nephrol. 2021 Dec;73(6):711-723. doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.21.04388-3. Epub 2021 Jun 22.
3
Effectiveness of ultrasound-guided shockwave lithotripsy and predictors of its success rate in pediatric population: A report from a national reference center.超声引导下冲击波碎石术治疗小儿尿路结石的疗效及影响其碎石成功率的因素:来自国家参考中心的报告。
J Pediatr Urol. 2021 Feb;17(1):78.e1-78.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2020.10.014. Epub 2020 Oct 20.
4
Role of pelvicalyceal anatomy in the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: outcomes with a systematic review of literature.肾盂肾盏解剖结构在逆行性肾内手术(RIRS)治疗下极结石结局中的作用:文献系统回顾的结果。
Urolithiasis. 2020 Jun;48(3):263-270. doi: 10.1007/s00240-019-01150-0. Epub 2019 Aug 1.
5
A prospective randomized comparison among SWL, PCNL and RIRS for lower calyceal stones less than 2 cm: a multicenter experience : A better understanding on the treatment options for lower pole stones.SWL、PCNL 和 RIRS 治疗 2cm 以下下盏结石的前瞻性随机对照研究:多中心经验:对下极结石治疗选择的更好理解。
World J Urol. 2017 Dec;35(12):1967-1975. doi: 10.1007/s00345-017-2084-7. Epub 2017 Sep 5.
6
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery Versus Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal Stones Smaller Than 2 cm: A Randomized Clinical Trial.逆行性肾内手术与冲击波碎石术治疗小于2厘米肾结石的随机临床试验
Urol J. 2016 Oct 10;13(5):2823-2828.
7
Is flexible ureterorenoscopy and laser lithotripsy the new gold standard for lower pole renal stones when compared to shock wave lithotripsy: Comparative outcomes from a University hospital over similar time period.与冲击波碎石术相比,软性输尿管肾镜检查和激光碎石术是否是治疗下极肾结石的新金标准:一所大学医院在相似时间段内的比较结果。
Cent European J Urol. 2015;68(2):183-6. doi: 10.5173/ceju.2015.509. Epub 2015 Mar 9.
8
Comparison between retrograde intrarenal surgery and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in the treatment of lower pole kidney stones up to 15 mm. Prospective, randomized study.逆行性肾内手术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗直径达15毫米的下极肾结石的比较。前瞻性随机研究。
Actas Urol Esp. 2015 May;39(4):236-42. doi: 10.1016/j.acuro.2014.08.003. Epub 2014 Nov 28.
9
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)与经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)或逆行肾内手术(RIRS)治疗肾结石的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Nov 24(11):CD007044. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007044.pub3.
10
A Prospective Randomized Comparison Between Shock Wave Lithotripsy and Flexible Ureterorenoscopy for Lower Caliceal Stones ≤2 cm: A Single-Center Experience.冲击波碎石术与软性输尿管肾镜术治疗直径≤2 cm下盏结石的前瞻性随机对照研究:单中心经验
J Endourol. 2015 May;29(5):575-9. doi: 10.1089/end.2013.0473. Epub 2014 Nov 18.