经皮肾镜取石术治疗输尿管上段结石临床观察  

Clinical Observation of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Treatment of Upper Ureteral Calculus

作　　者：蔡奕川[1] 李迎东[1] 陈祥鹏[1] 詹振声[1] 袁树森[1] 潘涟春[1] 

机构地区：[1]广东省潮州市中心医院泌尿外科,广东潮州521021

出　　处：《临床医学工程》2014年第12期1613-1614,共2页Clinical Medicine & Engineering

摘　　要：目的观察经皮肾镜取石术治疗输尿管上段结石的临床疗效。方法将108例输尿管上段结石患者随机分为观察组和对照组各54例。对照组患者行经尿道输尿管镜取石术治疗,观察组患者行经皮肾镜取石术治疗。观察两组患者的手术时间、术中出血量、住院时间、结石清除情况及并发症的发生情况,对比两组临床疗效。结果观察组患者的手术时间和住院时间均明显长于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.01);两组的术中出血量无显著差异(P>0.05);观察组患者的结石清除情况及并发症的发生情况均明显优于对照组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论在输尿管上段结石的临床治疗中,经皮肾镜取石术与经尿道输尿管镜取石术各有优缺点,都具有较高的临床应用价值,应根据患者具体情况合理选用治疗方法。Objective To observe the clinical efficacy of percutaneous nephrolithotomy （PCNL） in treating upper ureteral calculus. Methods 108 cases of patients with upper ureteral calculus were randomly divided into observation group and control group, 54 cases per group. The control group received ureteroscopic lithotripsy （URL）, while the observation group received PCNL. The operative time, bleeding volume, hospital stays, conditions of stone clearance and complications of two groups were observed, the clinical effect of two groups were compared. Results The operative time and hospital stays of the observation group were significantly longer than those of the control group, with statistical difference （P 〈0.01）; the bleeding volume of two groups had no statistical difference （P 〉0.05）; the conditions of stone clearance and complications of the. observation group were significantly better than those of the control group, with statistical difference （P 〈0.05）. Conclusions As both PCNL and URL have advantages and disadvantages in the treatment of upper ureteral calculus with high clinical application value, suitable treatment measures will be selected according to patients＇ specific circumstances.

关 键 词：输尿管上段结石 经皮肾镜取石术 经尿道输尿管镜取石术 

分 类 号：R691.4[医药卫生—泌尿科学]