电磁式碎石机与液电式碎石机治疗输尿管结石疗效比较  

In situ ESWL of ureteral stones: comparison between an electrohydraulic and an electromagnetic SW-source

作　　者：周惜才[1] 叶章群[1] 曾晓勇[1] 朱静[1] 谢凯[1] 

机构地区：[1]华中科技大学同济医学院附属同济医院泌尿外科,武汉430030

出　　处：《临床泌尿外科杂志》2004年第7期385-387,共3页Journal of Clinical Urology

摘　　要：目的 :比较一种新型电磁式碎石机与常用的液电式碎石机的疗效及副作用。方法 :分别使用电磁式碎石机和液电式碎石机治疗输尿管结石各 10 0例 ,治疗后应用X线腹部平片、静脉肾盂造影或B超评估其疗效 ,并随访 3个月 ,了解其结石清除率 ;观察并记录治疗后并发症。结果 :应用电磁式碎石机治疗的患者总有效率为95 % ,明显高于应用液电式碎石机治疗者的 6 5 % (P <0 .0 5 ) ;而其肾绞痛、恶心、呕吐、发热等并发症则低于后者。结论 :对于输尿管结石的治疗 ,电磁式碎石机的疗效优于液电式碎石机 ,它是一种更为安全有效的方法。Objective:To compare the effect and side-effect of shock wave lithotripsy by a newer electromagnetic lithotriptor(Dornier-Delte Compat, Germany) with those of a contemporary electrohydraulic lithotriptor(JT-ESWL-Ⅲ,Shanghai).Methods:Between December 2000 and December 2002, 200 patients with ureteral calculi were divided into two equivalent groups randomly and treated respectively by the electromagnetic lithotriptor and the electrohydraulic one; In each group curative effect were estimated by plain abdominal x-ray(KUB) and intravenous urography(IVP)or renal ultrasound after lithotripsy; All cases were followed up for 3 months to determine their stone-free rate; The incidence rates of side effect after lithotripsy in two groups were observed and recorded.Results:The total efficient rate of the group by the electromagnetic lithotripter was 95%, distinctly higher than the group by electrohydraulic one 65% (P< 0.05 ), meanwhile, the incidence rates of side effect (such as kidney colic, nausea, vomiting, fever, ect) of the electromagnetic group was lower than that of the electrohydraulic group.Conclusions:As to in situ ESWL of ureteral calculi, electromagnetic lithotriptor is a safer and more effective methods than electrohydraulic one.

关 键 词：输尿管结石 体外冲击波碎石术 

分 类 号：R699[医药卫生—泌尿科学]