摘要
目的比较体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)、开放性输尿管切开取石术、微创手术及联合手术治疗输尿管结石的临床效果。方法选取2011年1月至2014年12月榆林市第一医院泌尿外科收治的诊断为输尿管结石的患者80例。依据患者病情将患者分为ESWL组、开放性手术组、微创手术组、联合手术组。结果 4组患者手术时间、结石一次清除率、术中出血量、手术成功率之间差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),4组患者住院天数、重复治疗率、住院费用、术后7d和1个月结石清除率及患者满意率等方面差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),术中并发症发生率和术后辅助治疗比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论输尿管结石的4种治疗方法各自有优缺点,其中联合手术方法安全、可靠有效、结石清除率高、并发症少。与此同时,还要根据患者自身的情况和医疗设施来选择适合患者的治疗方法。
Objective To compare the clinical effects of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy （ESWL）,open ureteral incision nephrolithotomy （open surgery）, minimally invasive surgery and combined surgery for the treatment of ureteral calculi. Methods 80 patients with ureteral calculi in our hospital from January 2011 to December 201 l were selected and divided into the ESWL group,open surgery group, minimally invasive surgery group and com- bined surgery group according to the disease condition. Results The operation time,once stone clearance rate,intrao perative blood loss volume and surgical success rate had statistical differences among 4 groups （P〈0. 05） ,the hospi- talization days,repeating treatment rate, hospitalization expenses, calculi clearance rate on postoperative 7 d and 1 month and postoperative patient satisfaction had statistically significant differences among 4 groups （P〈0.05）, the intraoperative complications and postoperative adjuvant therapy had statistically significant difference （P〈0. 05）. Conclusion The four kinds of treatment method for treating ureteral calculi have their own advantages and disadvan- tages,in which the combined operation method is safe,reliable and effective with high stone clearance rate and fewer complications. At the same time, the treatment method suitable for patients should be selected according to the pa tientfs own condition and medical facilities.
出处
《检验医学与临床》
CAS
2015年第16期2388-2390,共3页
Laboratory Medicine and Clinic
关键词
体外冲击波碎石术
开放性手术
微创手术
联合手术
extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy
open surgery
minimally invasive surgery
combined surgery
作者简介
高海东，男，副主任医师，本科，主要从事泌尿外科微创治疗的研究。
