• 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

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。

RIRS with FV-UAS vs. ESWL for the management of 1-2 cm lower pole renal calculi in obese patients: a prospective study.

作者信息

Men Chao, Xu Miao, Zhang Si-Cong, Wang Qing, Wu Jie, Li Yun-Peng

机构信息

Department of Urology, Chifeng Cancer Hospital, Chifeng, China.

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

出版信息

Front Med (Lausanne). 2024 Oct 30;11:1464491. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1464491. eCollection 2024.

DOI:10.3389/fmed.2024.1464491
PMID:39540048
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11557427/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) combined with flexible vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath (FV-UAS) versus extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) for the management of 1-2 cm lower pole renal calculi (LPC) in obese patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective, randomized study included 149 obese patients with 1-2 cm LPC. Patients were allocated into two groups: 76 patients underwent RIRS with FV-UAS, and 73 patients received ESWL. The parameters assessed included stone-free rate (SFR), retreatment rate, complications, operative time, and pain intensity measured by the visual analog scale (VAS). Stone-free status was defined as the absence of stones on computed tomography or residual fragments smaller than 4 mm at 4 weeks post-procedure.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics of the two groups were comparable. The SFR was significantly higher in the RIRS group, reaching 86.8%, compared to 63.0% in the ESWL group ( = 0.034). Furthermore, the retreatment rate was significantly lower in the RIRS group, at 5.2%, versus 24.7% in the ESWL group ( < 0.001). The average operative time for RIRS was notably longer, at 65.3 ± 6.4 min, compared to 25.3 ± 7.8 min for ESWL ( < 0.001). The complication rates were 9.2% for the RIRS group and 6.8% for the ESWL group, with no statistically significant difference ( = 0.326). All complications were classified as Grade I or II according to the modified Clavien classification system. No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding pain VAS scores and the composition of the stones.

CONCLUSION

RIRS with FV-UAS demonstrated superior efficacy, evidenced by a higher SFR and reduced retreatment rates compared to ESWL, despite a longer operative duration. Both treatment modalities showed comparable safety profiles. RIRS with FV-UAS emerges as a viable, effective, and reproducible intervention for managing 1-2 cm LPC in obese patients, providing significant clinical advantages.

摘要

目的

评估逆行肾内手术(RIRS)联合可弯曲真空辅助输尿管鞘(FV-UAS)与体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)治疗肥胖患者1-2厘米下极肾结石(LPC)的疗效和安全性。

患者与方法

这项前瞻性随机研究纳入了149例患有1-2厘米LPC的肥胖患者。患者被分为两组:76例患者接受了RIRS联合FV-UAS治疗,73例患者接受了ESWL治疗。评估的参数包括无石率(SFR)、再次治疗率、并发症、手术时间以及通过视觉模拟量表(VAS)测量的疼痛强度。无石状态定义为术后4周计算机断层扫描显示无结石或残留碎片小于4毫米。

结果

两组的基线特征具有可比性。RIRS组的SFR显著更高,达到86.8%,而ESWL组为63.0%(P = 0.034)。此外,RIRS组的再次治疗率显著更低,为5.2%,而ESWL组为24.7%(P < 0.001)。RIRS的平均手术时间明显更长,为65.3±6.4分钟,而ESWL为25.3±7.8分钟(P < 0.001)。RIRS组的并发症发生率为9.2%,ESWL组为6.8%,无统计学显著差异(P = 0.326)。根据改良的Clavien分类系统,所有并发症均被分类为I级或II级。两组在疼痛VAS评分和结石成分方面未观察到显著差异。

结论

与ESWL相比,RIRS联合FV-UAS显示出更高的疗效,表现为更高的SFR和更低的再次治疗率,尽管手术时间更长。两种治疗方式的安全性相当。RIRS联合FV-UAS是治疗肥胖患者1-2厘米LPC的一种可行、有效且可重复的干预措施,具有显著的临床优势。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/52fe/11557427/3ac85d864264/fmed-11-1464491-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/52fe/11557427/7ca64e29de2d/fmed-11-1464491-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/52fe/11557427/3ac85d864264/fmed-11-1464491-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/52fe/11557427/7ca64e29de2d/fmed-11-1464491-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/52fe/11557427/3ac85d864264/fmed-11-1464491-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
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.
2
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.
3
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.
4
Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery vs. Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy vs. Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Lower Pole Renal Stones 10-20 mm : A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review.逆行性肾内手术与经皮肾镜取石术及体外冲击波碎石术治疗10-20mm下极肾结石的Meta分析与系统评价
Urol J. 2019 May 5;16(2):97-106. doi: 10.22037/uj.v0i0.4681.
5
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.
6
Comparative efficacy and safety of intelligent pressure-controlled versus flexible vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath for 2-4 cm renal calculi.智能压力控制输尿管鞘与柔性真空辅助输尿管鞘治疗2-4厘米肾结石的疗效和安全性比较
Minerva Urol Nephrol. 2024 Aug 2. doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.24.05814-2.
7
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.
8
Flexible Ureterorenoscopy Versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for the Treatment of Renal Pelvis Stones of 10-20 mm in Obese Patients.肥胖患者中,柔性输尿管肾镜术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗10-20毫米肾盂结石的比较
J Lasers Med Sci. 2015 Fall;6(4):162-6. doi: 10.15171/jlms.2015.12. Epub 2015 Oct 27.
9
Effect of ureteric access sheath on outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stone disease: a randomized controlled trial.输尿管通路鞘对肾结石病逆行性肾内手术结局的影响:一项随机对照试验。
World J Urol. 2023 May;41(5):1401-1406. doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04369-0. Epub 2023 Mar 25.
10
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. 2009 Oct 7(4):CD007044. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007044.pub2.

本文引用的文献

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
Urolithiasis: History, epidemiology, aetiologic factors and management.尿石症:历史、流行病学、病因学因素及处理。
Malays J Pathol. 2023 Dec;45(3):333-352.
3
Role of Noncontrast Computed Tomography Parameters in Predicting the Outcome of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Upper Urinary Stones Cases: A Meta-analysis.
非增强计算机断层扫描参数在预测体外冲击波碎石术治疗上尿路结石病例结局中的作用:一项荟萃分析。
Acad Radiol. 2024 Aug;31(8):3282-3296. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2023.10.021. Epub 2023 Nov 18.
4
2022 Recommendations of the AFU Lithiasis Committee: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL).2022 年 AFU 结石委员会推荐:体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)。
Prog Urol. 2023 Nov;33(14):812-824. doi: 10.1016/j.purol.2023.08.011.
5
Unfavorable factors in accessing the pelvicalyceal system during retrograde flexible ureteroscopy (fURS).逆行软性输尿管镜检查(fURS)中进入肾盂肾盏系统的不利因素。
J Med Life. 2023 Mar;16(3):372-380. doi: 10.25122/jml-2023-0005.
6
Intrarenal Pressure with Vacuum-Assisted Ureteral Access Sheaths Using an Cadaveric Porcine Model.使用猪尸体模型研究真空辅助输尿管通路鞘的肾内压力
J Endourol. 2023 Mar;37(3):353-357. doi: 10.1089/end.2022.0573.
7
Best Practice in Interventional Management of Urolithiasis: An Update from the European Association of Urology Guidelines Panel for Urolithiasis 2022.最佳介入性尿路结石管理实践:2022 年欧洲泌尿外科学会尿路结石指南专家组更新。
Eur Urol Focus. 2023 Jan;9(1):199-208. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.06.014. Epub 2022 Aug 1.
8
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.
9
Prevalence and Trends in Kidney Stone Among Adults in the USA: Analyses of National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2007-2018 Data.美国成年人肾结石的患病率和趋势:对 2007-2018 年国家健康和营养调查数据的分析。
Eur Urol Focus. 2021 Nov;7(6):1468-1475. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.08.011. Epub 2020 Sep 6.
10
Nephrolithiasis in the Obese Patient.肥胖患者的肾结石病
Curr Urol Rep. 2019 May 18;20(7):36. doi: 10.1007/s11934-019-0898-0.