• 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

无管经皮肾手术

Tubeless percutaneous renal surgery.

作者信息

Bellman G C, Davidoff R, Candela J, Gerspach J, Kurtz S, Stout L

机构信息

Department of Urology, Kaiser Permanente, Los Angeles, California, USA.

出版信息

J Urol. 1997 May;157(5):1578-82.

PMID:9112480
Abstract

PURPOSE

We challenge the requirement for routine placement of a nephrostomy tube following percutaneous renal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 50 patients underwent tubeless percutaneous renal procedures consisting of nephrolithotripsy, endopyelotomy, and stone extraction plus endopyelotomy performed during the same setting. In the initial 30 patients a Double-J* stent and a Councill nephrostomy tube were placed at the end of the procedure. The Councill catheter was removed 2 to 3 hours postoperatively. The subsequent 20 patients received only a Double-J stent with no Councill catheter. This study group was compared to a control group of 50 age, sex and procedure matched patients who had previously undergone standard percutaneous renal procedures with routine placement of postoperative nephrostomy tubes. The incidence of complications, analgesia requirements, length of hospitalization, interval to return to normal activities and cost of treatment were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

All 50 tubeless percutaneous procedures were performed successfully without significant complications. In the initial 15 patients postoperative renal ultrasound demonstrated no urinoma. Hospitalization was 0.6 days for the study group and 4.6 days for the controls (p = 0.0001). Average parenteral or intramuscular analgesia requirements were 11.58 and 36.06 mg. morphine sulfate, respectively (p = 0.0001), with patients requiring oral analgesia for 5.9 and 11.7 days, respectively (p = 0.0001). Patients in the study group returned to normal activities within 17.85 days versus 26.6 days for the controls (p = 0.0004). The costs of the procedures were $1,638 and $3,750 (129% greater), respectively, for a cost saving of $2,112 per case.

CONCLUSIONS

Tubeless percutaneous renal surgery is a safe procedure and offers numerous advantages over routine placement of a nephrostomy tube. The hospitalization, analgesia requirements, return to normal activities as well as cost are significantly less with this new technique.

摘要

目的

我们对经皮肾手术后常规放置肾造瘘管的必要性提出质疑。

材料与方法

共有50例患者接受了无管经皮肾手术,包括碎石术、肾盂内切开术以及在同一手术过程中进行的取石术加肾盂内切开术。最初的30例患者在手术结束时放置了双J支架和考恩西尔肾造瘘管。考恩西尔导管在术后2至3小时拔除。随后的20例患者仅接受了双J支架,未放置考恩西尔导管。将该研究组与一个由50例年龄、性别和手术相匹配的患者组成的对照组进行比较,这些对照患者此前接受了术后常规放置肾造瘘管的标准经皮肾手术。比较两组之间的并发症发生率、镇痛需求、住院时间、恢复正常活动的间隔时间以及治疗费用。

结果

所有50例无管经皮手术均成功完成,无明显并发症。最初的15例患者术后肾脏超声检查未发现尿瘤。研究组的住院时间为0.6天,对照组为4.6天(p = 0.0001)。平均胃肠外或肌肉注射镇痛需求量分别为11.58和36.06毫克硫酸吗啡(p = 0.0001),患者分别需要口服镇痛5.9天和11.7天(p = 0.0001)。研究组患者在17.85天内恢复正常活动,而对照组为26.6天(p = 0.0004)。手术费用分别为1638美元和3750美元(高出129%),每例节省费用2112美元。

结论

无管经皮肾手术是一种安全的手术方式,与常规放置肾造瘘管相比具有诸多优势。这项新技术在住院时间、镇痛需求、恢复正常活动以及费用方面都显著更低。

相似文献

1
Tubeless percutaneous renal surgery.无管经皮肾手术
J Urol. 1997 May;157(5):1578-82.
2
"Tubeless" percutaneous surgery: a new advance in the technique of percutaneous renal surgery.“无管”经皮手术:经皮肾手术技术的一项新进展。
Tech Urol. 1997 Spring;3(1):6-11.
3
Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy.完全无管经皮肾镜取石术
J Endourol. 2004 Sep;18(7):647-8. doi: 10.1089/end.2004.18.647.
4
Tubeless percutaneous renal surgery: review of first 112 patients.无管经皮肾手术:对首批112例患者的回顾
Urology. 2002 Apr;59(4):527-31; discussion 531. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01627-2.
5
Safety and efficacy of tubeless percutaneous renal surgery.无管经皮肾手术的安全性和有效性。
J Endourol. 2007 Sep;21(9):977-84. doi: 10.1089/end.2006.0229.
6
Totally tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in renal anomalies.肾异常情况下的完全无管经皮肾镜取石术
J Endourol. 2008 Sep;22(9):2131-4. doi: 10.1089/end.2008.0015.
7
Tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: what about replacing the Double-J stent with a ureteral catheter?无管经皮肾镜取石术:用输尿管导管替代双J支架管如何?
J Endourol. 2008 Feb;22(2):273-5. doi: 10.1089/end.2007.0162.
8
A Randomized Controlled Comparison of Nephrostomy Drainage vs Ureteral Stent Following Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Using the Wisconsin StoneQOL.使用威斯康星州结石生活质量量表对经皮肾镜取石术后肾造瘘引流与输尿管支架置入进行的随机对照比较
J Endourol. 2016 Dec;30(12):1275-1284. doi: 10.1089/end.2016.0235.
9
A randomized comparison of tubeless and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy.无管与标准经皮肾镜取石术的随机对照研究
J Endourol. 2008 Mar;22(3):439-42. doi: 10.1089/end.2007.0118.
10
Randomized trial comparing modified tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy with tailed stent with percutaneous nephrostomy with small-bore tube.比较改良无管经皮肾镜取石术带尾支架与经皮肾造瘘术带细管的随机试验。
J Endourol. 2006 Oct;20(10):766-70. doi: 10.1089/end.2006.20.766.

引用本文的文献

1
Safety and efficacy of standard vs. tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in pediatric populations: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.标准经皮肾镜取石术与无管经皮肾镜取石术在儿科人群中的安全性和有效性:一项更新的系统评价和荟萃分析。
BMC Urol. 2025 May 2;25(1):110. doi: 10.1186/s12894-025-01798-4.
2
Pain management in percutaneous nephrolithotomy - an approach rooted in pathophysiology.经皮肾镜取石术中的疼痛管理——一种基于病理生理学的方法。
Nat Rev Urol. 2025 Jan 13. doi: 10.1038/s41585-024-00973-w.
3
Comparison of External Ureteral Catheter and Double-J stent as Drainage Methods for Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
无管化经皮肾镜取石术中外置输尿管导管与双 J 管引流效果的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Int Braz J Urol. 2025 Jan-Feb;51(1). doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2024.0356.
4
Comparison of standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy and total tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the supine position.标准经皮肾镜取石术与仰卧位完全无管经皮肾镜取石术的比较。
Urolithiasis. 2024 Jun 4;52(1):82. doi: 10.1007/s00240-024-01580-5.
5
Super-mini PCNL (SMP) with suction versus standard PCNL for the management of renal calculi of 1.5 cm-3 cm: a randomized controlled study from a university teaching hospital.超小型经皮肾镜取石术(SMP)联合吸引术与标准经皮肾镜取石术治疗1.5厘米至3厘米肾结石的疗效比较:一所大学教学医院的随机对照研究
World J Urol. 2024 Apr 24;42(1):257. doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-04954-x.
6
Comparison of safety and efficacy of tubeless vs. conventional mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with Escherichia coli bacteriuria.非管型与传统微创经皮肾镜取石术治疗大肠埃希菌菌尿症患者的安全性和疗效比较。
Urolithiasis. 2024 Apr 3;52(1):59. doi: 10.1007/s00240-024-01567-2.
7
Ureteral stent after PCNL: is leaving the threads through the percutaneous tract safe and better tolerated?经皮肾镜取石术后留置输尿管支架:经皮通道留置支架线是否安全且更耐受?
World J Urol. 2024 Feb 10;42(1):77. doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04767-4.
8
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in supine position with less than 24-hour hospital stay; a single-center experience.仰卧位经皮肾镜取石术,住院时间少于24小时:单中心经验
Arab J Urol. 2023 Jul 16;22(1):54-60. doi: 10.1080/2090598X.2023.2234254. eCollection 2024.
9
A Comparative Analysis between Flexible Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy and Tubeless Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Treatment of >15 mm Non-Obstructing Proximal Ureteral Stones.软性输尿管镜碎石术与无管经皮肾镜取石术治疗直径>15mm非梗阻性近端输尿管结石的对比分析
J Clin Med. 2023 Dec 7;12(24):7541. doi: 10.3390/jcm12247541.
10
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.