论文部分内容阅读
目的对比观察标准通道与微通道经皮肾镜碎石取石术治疗上尿路结石的临床疗效。方法选取该院治疗的上尿路结石患者86例,按照随机数字表法分为观察组和对照组各43例。观察组行标准通道经皮肾镜碎石取石术,对照组行微通道经皮肾镜碎石取石术,比较2组患者手术用时、住院时间、术后输血情况、结石清除率、术后并发症。结果 2组住院时间、输血率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);观察组手术时间明显短于对照组,结石清除率、术后并发症发生率均明显高于对照组,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论对于上尿路结石患者展开治疗时,标准通道经皮肾镜碎石取石术具有结石清除率高、耗时短等优点,而微通道经皮肾镜碎石取石术术后并发症较少,两种手术各有优势。
Objective To compare the clinical effects of standard access and microchannel percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of upper urinary tract calculi. Methods Totally 86 patients with upper urinary tract calculi treated in this hospital were divided into observation group (43 cases) and control group (43 cases) according to random number table. In the observation group, the percutaneous nephrolithotomy lithotripsy was performed in the control group, and the micro channel percutaneous nephrolithotomy lithotripsy in the control group. The operation time, hospitalization time, postoperative blood transfusion, stone clearance rate, postoperative complications disease. Results There was no significant difference in hospitalization time and blood transfusion rate between the two groups (P> 0.05). The operation time in the observation group was significantly shorter than that in the control group, the stone removal rate and postoperative complication rate were significantly higher than those in the control group Statistical significance (P <0.05). Conclusions The standard channel percutaneous nephrolithotripotomy has the advantages of high stone clearance rate and short time-consuming in the treatment of patients with upper urinary tract stones, and less complications after micro-channel percutaneous nephrolithotomy Both have their own advantages.