输尿管镜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.docVIP

输尿管镜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 　　[摘要] 目的 探讨在输尿管结石患者中，应用输尿管镜钬激光碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术进行治疗的临床疗效。方法 选取该院收治的输尿管结石患者300例进行分析，将其随机分为对照组和观察组，每组150例。对照组采用体外冲击波碎石术方案，观察组采用输尿管镜钬激光碎石术方案。观察两组患者的临床治疗效果，以及并发症发生情况。结果 观察组患者的手术时间明显短于对照组；结石直径在1 cm以上，观察组的结石排净率明显高于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P0.05）。结石位于输尿管上段，两组在结石排净率上相比差异无统计学意义（P0.05）。结石位于输尿管中下段，观察组患者的结石排净率明显高于对照组，差异有统计学意义（P0.05）。结论 对于输尿管结石患者而言，两种治疗方案各有利弊，应该根据病情合理选择。如果结石位于上段且直径在1 cm以下，可以采取体外冲击波碎石术；如果结石位于中下段且直径在1 cm以上，优先推荐输尿管镜钬激光碎石术。 　　[关键词] 输尿管结石；钬激光碎石术；体外冲击波碎石术；临床疗效；并发症 　　[中图分类号] R699 [文献标识码] A [文章编号] 1674-0742（2015）05（c）-0064-03 　　[Abstract] Objective To investigate the clinical efficacy of YAG laser lithotripsy and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral stones. Methods 300 patients with ureteral stones admitted to our hospital were selected and randomly divided into control group and observation group with 150 in each group. Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy was used in the control group， while YAG laser lithotripsy was performed in the observation group. The clinical effect and incidence of complications of the two groups were observed. Results The operation time of the observation group was obviously shorter than that of the control group； Clearance rate of the stones （diameter1 cm） of the observation group was higher than that of the control group， and the difference was statistically significant（P0.05）； The difference of clearance rate of the stones （diameter?1 cm） between the two groups was not obvious and statistically significant（P?0.05）； The difference of clearance rate of upper ureteral stones between the two groups was not obvious and statistically significant（P?0.05）； The difference of clearance rate of middle-lower ureteral stones between the two groups was obvious and statistically significant（P0.05）.The difference between the incidence of complications of the two groups was not obvious and statistically significant（P?0.05）.Conclusion For patients with ureteral stones， two therapeutic schemes have their advantages and d