微创经皮输尿管镜与逆行输尿管镜治疗嵌顿性输尿管.docVIP

微创经皮输尿管镜与逆行输尿管镜治疗嵌顿性输尿管 [摘要 ] 目的 对比微创经皮输尿管镜与逆行输尿管镜 治疗两种治疗方法在治疗嵌顿性输尿管上段结石的疗效。方 法 方便选择 2013 年 1 月― 2015 年 1 月该院收治的 220 例嵌顿性输尿管上段结石患者并采用随机数字法将其分成观察 组（ 110 例）和对照组（ 110 例），观察组患者采用微创经皮输尿管镜治疗方法，对照组采用逆行输尿管镜治疗方法，比 较两组患者的结石清除率。结果 治疗 1 个月后观察组的结石清除率为 100%，对照组的结石清除率为 91.14%，观察组明显高于对照组，住院费用明显低于对照组（ P0.05）。结论 微创经皮输尿管镜治疗嵌顿性输尿管上段结石的结石清除率高，值得使用。 [关键词 ] 微创技术；经皮输尿管镜治疗；逆行输尿管镜 治疗 [中图分类号 ] R693+.4 [文献标识码 ] A [文章编号 ] 1674-0742（ 2016） 05（a） -0093-02 [Abstract] Objective To compare the curative effect of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ureter radioparent calculus in treatment of impacted upper ureterolithiasis. Methods 220 cases of patients with impacted upper ureterolithiasis admitted and treated in our hospital from January 2013 to January 2015 were selected and randomly divided into two groups with 110 cases in each ， the observation group were treated with minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy ， the control group were treated with ureter radioparent calculus ， and the stone-free rates of the two groups were compared. Results The stone-free rate in the observation group was obviously higher than that in the control group after 1 month ，（ 100% vs 91.14%）， and the hospitalization cost in the observation group was obviously lower than that in the control group ， P0.05. onclusion The stone-free rate of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy in treatment of impacted upper ureterolithiasis is high ， which is worth application. [Key words] Minimally invasive technique ； Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy treatment ； Ureter radioparent calculus treatment 传统的治疗方法针对输尿管上段嵌顿性结石的治疗主 要采取的是体外冲击波碎石（ ESWL），而这种治疗方式对于 嵌顿时间较长的结石效果不佳且极易引发严重的并发症 [1-2] 。 随着医疗技术的不断发展，临床对嵌顿性输尿管结石的治疗 方法也不断进行改进，为了更好地对嵌顿性输尿管结石患者 进行治疗，该院对比了对比微创经皮输尿管镜与逆行输尿管 镜治疗两种治疗方法在治疗嵌顿性输尿管上段结石的疗效， 方便选取 2013 年 1 月― 2015 年 1 月该院收治的 220 例嵌顿 性输尿管上段结石患者分别给予不同治疗措施，并对比两种 治疗方法的结石清除率、 住院时长和住院费用， 现报道如下。 资料与方法 1.1 一般资料 方便选择 2013 年 1 月― 2015 年 1 月该院收治的 220 例 嵌顿性输尿管上段结石患者，所有患者均检验为中度以上肾 积液或结石停留时间在同一个部位 2 个月以上。采用随机数字法将其分成观察组和对照组