钬激光、ESWL、气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效比较  

Contrast of ESWL PL and LL therapeutic effect in ureterolith

作　　者：袁润强[1] 魏佳莉[1] 李志坚[1] 李新民[1] 李耀群[1] 黄红星[1] 张倩华[1] 冯锦芳[1] 

机构地区：[1]广东省中山市人民医院泌尿外科,广东中山528400

出　　处：《临床泌尿外科杂志》2001年第11期456-457,共2页Journal of Clinical Urology

摘　　要：目的 :比较钬激光碎石术 (L L)、体外冲击波碎石术 (ESWL)、气压弹道碎石术 (PL)治疗输尿管结石的疗效和安全性。方法 :总结 ESWL、PL、L L 治疗输尿管结石的临床资料 ,其中 ESWL 15 0例、PL 6 6例、L L 5 0例。结果 :L L 单次手术碎石率为 96 .0 % ,PL 为 6 0 .6 % ,ESWL 为 5 0 .7% ;L L 平均结石排净时间为 2 2 d,PL 为 40d,ESWL为 90 d;L L组无明显并发症 ,PL组有 2例发生穿孔 ,ESWL组有 3例发生石街。结论 :L L在效率及安全性方面明显优于 PL与 ESWL。 L L是治疗输尿管结石的一种较新、高效、安全的方法。Purpose:To contrast the therapeutic effect and safety of ESWL,PL and LL in the treatment of ureterolith.Method:We investigated the clinical material on ESWL,PL and LL.150 patients underwent ESWL,66 PL and 50 LL.Result:LL reached 96.0 % lithotriptic effect just only one lithotripsy.PL did 60.6 % and ESWL did 50.7 %.The ureterolith was eliminated totally on an average of 22 days in LL group,40 days in PL group and 90 days in ESWL group.No obvious complication occured in LL group.Uretel perforation occured two of PL group.Three of ESWL group had stone street.Conclusion:LL is much better than PL and ESWL in the effect and safety.LL is a new,efficient and safe method in the treatment of ureterolith.

关 键 词：输尿管结石 碎石术 钛激光 体外冲击波 气压弹道 LL ESWL PL 

分 类 号：R693.4[医药卫生—泌尿科学]