评价钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的有效性和安全性
|
摘要
目的探讨评价钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的有效性和安全性分析。方法选取2012年1月至2016年10月我院收治的84例输尿管结石患者,采用随机数字法将其分为对照组42例与观察组42例,对照组患者采用体外冲击波碎石术治疗,观察组患者使用钬激光碎石术进行治疗,对比两组患者临床疗效及预后。结果观察组42例患者经治疗后,住院时间、手术时间等均明显低于对照组(P<0.05)。观察组42例患者经治疗后,临床碎石成功率显然高于对照组(P<0.05)。对两组患者进行持续1月跟踪随访,结石直径大于1cm,观察组患者排石率高于对照组(P<0.05)。结石直径小于1cm,观察组患者结石排出率高于对照组(P<0.05)。两组患者经治疗后,观察组42例患者不良反应发生率4.76%显然低于对照组不良反应发生率16.67%(P<0.05)。结论临床中治疗输尿管结石采用钬激光碎石术具有微创、操作简单、疗效显著,且安全性高等优点,值得临床应用。
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of holmium laser lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral calculi.Methods Choose from January 2012 to October 2016,84 cases of ureteral calculi were treated in our hospital,were randomly divided into control group of 42 cases and 42 cases in the observation group,the control group were treated by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy treatment,observation group were treated with holmium laser lithotripsy for treatment,compared two groups of patients with clinical curative effect and prognosis.Results The observation group,42 patients after treatment,hospitalization time,operation time were significantly lower than the control group(P<0.05).In the observation group,the success rate of clinical lithotripsy in 42 cases was obviously higher than that in the control group(P<0.05).The patients in the two groups were followed up for January years,and the diameter of stones was greater than 1 cm.The stone removal rate in the observation group was higher than that in the control group(P<0.05).Stone diameter was less than 1 cm,The stone excretion rate of the observation group was higher than that of the control group(P<0.05).Two groups of patients after treatment,the observation group of 42 patients with adverse reactions rate was 4.76%,apparently lower than the control group,adverse reaction rate was 16.67%(P<0.05).Conclusion Holmium laser lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral calculi has the advantages of minimal invasion,simple operation,obvious curative effect,high safety and so on,it is worthy of clinical application.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of holmium laser lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral calculi.Methods Choose from January 2012 to October 2016,84 cases of ureteral calculi were treated in our hospital,were randomly divided into control group of 42 cases and 42 cases in the observation group,the control group were treated by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy treatment,observation group were treated with holmium laser lithotripsy for treatment,compared two groups of patients with clinical curative effect and prognosis.Results The observation group,42 patients after treatment,hospitalization time,operation time were significantly lower than the control group(P<0.05).In the observation group,the success rate of clinical lithotripsy in 42 cases was obviously higher than that in the control group(P<0.05).The patients in the two groups were followed up for January years,and the diameter of stones was greater than 1 cm.The stone removal rate in the observation group was higher than that in the control group(P<0.05).Stone diameter was less than 1 cm,The stone excretion rate of the observation group was higher than that of the control group(P<0.05).Two groups of patients after treatment,the observation group of 42 patients with adverse reactions rate was 4.76%,apparently lower than the control group,adverse reaction rate was 16.67%(P<0.05).Conclusion Holmium laser lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral calculi has the advantages of minimal invasion,simple operation,obvious curative effect,high safety and so on,it is worthy of clinical application.
引文
[1]黄庭芳.输尿管镜钬激光碎石术和气压弹道碎石术治疗老年输尿管结石的有效性和安全性对比[J].中国老年学,2012,32(24):5605-5606.
[2]方平,郑少波,王林辉,等.输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管中下段结石的有效性及安全性[J].河北医药,2012,34(13):1961-1962.
[3]罗松涛,戢美英,粟宏伟,等.钬激光碎石术和气压弹道碎石术治疗老年输尿管结石的有效性和安全性对比[J].医学理论与实践,2016,29(24):3372-3373.
[4]张晶禹.腔内钬激光碎石术与开放手术治疗复杂性输尿管结石的有效性及安全性比较分析[J].中国社区医师:医学专业,2013,15(2):63-63.
[5]陈以德.输尿管镜钬激光碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)治疗输尿管结石的有效性和安全性分析[J].临床医药文献电子杂志,2014,1(7):1137-1138.
[6]田野.输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的安全性及有效性分析[J].中国实用医刊,2017,44(7):114-116.
[7]庞自力,肖传国,曾甫清,等.钬激光碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效比较[J].中华泌尿外科杂志,2004,25(10):691-693.
[8]李学朝,刘迎,杨江根,等.输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术与气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石的比较[J].中南大学学报(医学版),2005,30(5):601-603.
[9]朱凌峰,谭建明,吴卫真,等.输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石(附96例报告)[J].中国内镜杂志,2007,13(6):640-642.
[10]涂传仕,崔维奇,谌辉鹏,等.输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石50例[J].临床和实验医学杂志,2008,7(12):125-125.
[11]李法江,李志坚,黄海,等.输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效观察-附326例报告[J].新医学,2009,40(7):459-461.
[12]谭一伟,张冠,刘乃波,等.输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石[J].临床泌尿外科杂志,2009,24(5):363-364.
[2]方平,郑少波,王林辉,等.输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管中下段结石的有效性及安全性[J].河北医药,2012,34(13):1961-1962.
[3]罗松涛,戢美英,粟宏伟,等.钬激光碎石术和气压弹道碎石术治疗老年输尿管结石的有效性和安全性对比[J].医学理论与实践,2016,29(24):3372-3373.
[4]张晶禹.腔内钬激光碎石术与开放手术治疗复杂性输尿管结石的有效性及安全性比较分析[J].中国社区医师:医学专业,2013,15(2):63-63.
[5]陈以德.输尿管镜钬激光碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)治疗输尿管结石的有效性和安全性分析[J].临床医药文献电子杂志,2014,1(7):1137-1138.
[6]田野.输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的安全性及有效性分析[J].中国实用医刊,2017,44(7):114-116.
[7]庞自力,肖传国,曾甫清,等.钬激光碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效比较[J].中华泌尿外科杂志,2004,25(10):691-693.
[8]李学朝,刘迎,杨江根,等.输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术与气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石的比较[J].中南大学学报(医学版),2005,30(5):601-603.
[9]朱凌峰,谭建明,吴卫真,等.输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石(附96例报告)[J].中国内镜杂志,2007,13(6):640-642.
[10]涂传仕,崔维奇,谌辉鹏,等.输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石50例[J].临床和实验医学杂志,2008,7(12):125-125.
[11]李法江,李志坚,黄海,等.输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效观察-附326例报告[J].新医学,2009,40(7):459-461.
[12]谭一伟,张冠,刘乃波,等.输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石[J].临床泌尿外科杂志,2009,24(5):363-364.