摘要
目的探讨输尿管气压弹道碎石术和微创经皮肾镜碎石术治疗输尿管上段结石临床疗效。方法选取2009年月8月～2011年8月我院接受治疗的80例输尿管上段结石患者为研究对象,按照随机化原则将其随机分为观察组(40例)和对照组(40例)。观察组行输尿管气压弹道碎石术(TUPL),对照组行微创经皮肾镜碎石术,比较两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间,术后并发症发生率、碎石成功率、结石排出率。结果在碎石成功率、结石排出率这两项指标上,对照组要显著高于观察组(P<0.05),而在手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间,术后并发症发生率这四项指标的比较上观察组要显著低于对照组(P<0.05)。结论 TUPL治疗输尿管上段结石的疗效较MIP稍差,但出血少、并发症低,临床医师多根据医院设备条件及结石位置、大小、输尿管通过性等不同情况选择适当的治疗方式。
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy between transureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy（TUPL） and minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy（MIP） for treatment of upper ureteral stones..Methods From August 2009 to August 2011,.collected 80 patients with the upper ureteral stones in our hospital were divided into the control group（n=40） and the observation group（cases=40）.TUPL was performed in observation group and MIP in control group.The operation time,intraoperative blood loss,postoperative hospitalization time,incidence rate of postoperative complications,.lithotriptic rate and the lithecbole rate were compared between two groups.Results The lithotrip rate and lithecbole rate in control group were higher than that in the observation group（P0.05）,but the operation time,the intraoperative blood loss,the hospitalization time and the complications in the observation group were significant lower than that in the control group（P 0.05）.Conclusion As for clinical effectiveness,.TUPL may be inferior to that of MIP for upper ureteral stones,.but TUPL have advanteges in the less bleeding and few complications..The clinical physician should choose a suitable method according to hospital equipment condition,calculus in location,size and ureteral situation.
出处
《岭南现代临床外科》
2013年第4期329-331,共3页
Lingnan Modern Clinics in Surgery
