ESWL与输尿管镜治疗输尿管中下段结石的比较
中图分类号:

R693.4 R691.4


Comparison between effectiveness of lower and middle ureteric calculi treated by ESWL and that by TUPL
  • 摘要
  • | |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • | |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    目的比较体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)与输尿管镜下气压弹道碎石术(TUPL)治疗输尿管中下段结石的结石粉碎率、排净率和并发症.方法输尿管中下段结石患者292例,ESWL组132例,TUPL组160例.结果 ESWL组结石一次粉碎率90%(119/132),TUPL组结石一次粉碎率100%(155/155)(P<0.05);两组患者术后1个月的结石排净率分别为78.1%和99.4%(P<0.05);ESWL组的主要并发症为再次治疗率高(18.9%),而输尿管镜组的主要并发症为输尿管狭窄(2.5%).结论 TUPL不仅能作为ESWL失败的替代治疗,还可作为输尿管中下段结石的首选治疗手段.

    Abstract:

    Objective: To compare the effectiveness of lower and middle ureteric calculi treated by ESWL and that by TUPL. Methods: 292 cases of lower and middle ureteric calculi were divided into two groups: ESWL group (n=132) and TUPL group (n=160). Results: For lower and middle ureteric calculi resulted in a stone-free rate in ESWL group was 90% while 100% in TUPL group (P<0.05). Stone-free rate a month later in ESWL group and in TUPL group was 78.1% and 99.4% respectively (P<0.05). Main comlplication in ESWL group was had a retreatment(18.9%) while in TUPL group was ureterostenosis (1.25%). Conclusion: For the management of lower and middle ureteric calculi, TUPL might be a first method and might deal with the retreatment in patients treated by ESWL.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
引用本文

金玉明,李萍,邓钊云. ESWL与输尿管镜治疗输尿管中下段结石的比较[J].中国医学工程,2004,(6):78-79,82

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 最后修改日期:2004-11-09
  • 在线发布日期: 2020-07-26
您是第位访问者
中国医学工程 ® 2025 版权所有
技术支持:北京勤云科技发展有限公司
请使用 Firefox、Chrome、IE10、IE11、360极速模式、搜狗极速模式、QQ极速模式等浏览器,其他浏览器不建议使用!
管理员登录