[1]林剑峰 叶志彬 涂建平 梁福律 胡力仁 郭昭建 范先明*.可弯曲负压吸引鞘与常规鞘联合一次性输尿管软镜治疗上尿路结石的疗效比较[J].中国微创外科杂志,2023,01(9):652-656.
　Lin Jianfeng,Ye Zhibin,Tu Jianping,et al.Comparison of Flexible Negative Pressure Ureteral Access Sheath Versus Conventional Sheath Combined With Disposable Flexible Ureteroscope in the Treatment of Upper Urinary Tract Calculi[J].Chinese Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery,2023,01(9):652-656.
点击复制

可弯曲负压吸引鞘与常规鞘联合一次性输尿管软镜治疗上尿路结石的疗效比较()
分享到：

《中国微创外科杂志》[ISSN:1009-6604/CN:11-4526/R]

卷:
01
期数:
2023年9期
页码:
652-656
栏目:
临床研究
出版日期:
2023-09-25

文章信息/Info

Title:
Comparison of Flexible Negative Pressure Ureteral Access Sheath Versus Conventional Sheath Combined With Disposable Flexible Ureteroscope in the Treatment of Upper Urinary Tract Calculi
作者:
林剑峰 叶志彬 涂建平 梁福律 胡力仁 郭昭建 范先明*
(福建中医药大学附属厦门市第三医院泌尿外科,厦门361100)
Author(s):
Lin Jianfeng;  Ye Zhibin;  Tu Jianping;  et al.
Department of Urology, Xiamen Third Hospital Affiliated to Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine，Xiamen 361100, China
关键词:
上尿路结石; 可弯曲负压吸引鞘; 输尿管软镜碎石术
Keywords:
Upper urinary tract calculi; Flexible negative pressure ureteral access sheath; Flexible ureteroscope lithotripsy
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的探讨可弯曲负压吸引鞘联合一次性输尿管软镜治疗上尿路结石的疗效。方法回顾性分析2021年9月~2022年9月我院应用F7.5一次性输尿管软镜治疗上尿路结石，其中采用可弯曲负压吸引鞘97例(可弯曲鞘组)，常规鞘86例(常规鞘组)，比较2组围手术期及清石率等指标。结果可弯曲鞘组手术时间(101.8±11.4) min，显著长于常规鞘组(82.2±11.8)min(t=11.454,P=0.000)；术后血红蛋白下降值(6.6±2.4)g/L，显著高于常规鞘组(3.7±1.6)g/L(t=9288,P =0.000)；住院费用(22 329.5±1389.5)元，显著低于常规鞘组(24 763.9±1140.8)元(t=-12.854,P=0.000)；术后3 d清石率85.6%(83/97)，显著高于常规鞘组72.1%(62/86, χ2=5.030,P=0.025)；术后体外冲击波碎石5例，显著少于常规鞘组12例(χ2=4188，P=0.041)。2组后1个月清石率比较差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.036,P=0.850)。结论可弯曲负压吸引鞘联合一次性输尿管软镜碎石术提高术后近期清石率，增加操作的难度与时间，增加出血的风险，建议有一定软镜手术经验的医师进行操作。
Abstract:
ObjectiveTo explore the effectiveness of flexible negative pressure ureteral access sheath combined with disposable flexible ureteroscope in the treatment of upper urinary tract calculi.MethodsA retrospective analysis was made on patients treated with F7.5 disposable flexible ureteroscope from September 2021 to September 2022, among which 97 cases were combined with flexible negative pressure ureteral access sheaths (flexible sheath group) and 86 cases with conventional sheaths (conventional sheath group). The perioperative parameters and stone clearance rate between the two groups were compared. ResultsThe duration of the operation was significantly longer in the flexible sheath group ［(101.8±11.4) min］ than that in the conventional sheath group ［(82.2±11.8) min, t=11.454, P=0.000］. The postoperative hemoglobin decrease was significantly more in the flexible sheath group ［(6.6±2.4) g/L］ than that in the conventional sheath group ［(3.7±1.6) g/L, t=9.288, P=0.000］. The hospitalization expenses were significantly lower in the flexible sheath group ［(22 3295±13895) yuan］ than those in the conventional sheath group ［(24 763.9±1140.8) yuan, t=-12.854, P=0.000］. The stone removal rate at 3 days after surgery was significantly higher in the flexible sheath group ［85.6%(83/97)］ than that in the conventional sheath group ［72.1%(62/86), χ2=5.030, P=0.025］. The extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy after surgery was given in 5 cases in the flexible sheath group, which was significantly lower than that in the conventional sheath group (12 cases, χ2=4.188, P=0.041). There was no significant difference between the two groups in stone removal rate at 1 month after surgery (χ2=0036, P=0850).ConclusionsThe application of flexible negative pressure ureteral access sheath combined with disposable flexible ureteroscope can improve the shortterm postoperative stone clearance rate, but increase the difficulty and time of the operation, and increase the risk of bleeding. It is recommended to be carried out by doctors with strong experience in flexible ureteroscope.

参考文献/References:

[1]Alenezi H, Denstedt JD. Flexible ureteroscopy: technological advancements, current indications and outcomes in the treatment of urolithiasis. Asian J Urol,2015,2(3):133-141.
[2]吕建志,王鑫哲,赵战魁,等.输尿管软镜联合负压吸引治疗感染性肾结石的 Meta分析.中国内镜杂志,2021,27(8):52-60.
[3]黄健,王建业,孔垂泽,等.中国泌尿外科和男科疾病诊断治疗指南.北京:科学出版社,2019.237-259.
[4]Resorlu B, Unsal A, Gulec H, et al. A new scoring system for predicting stonefree rate after retrograde intrarenal surgery: The “resorluUnsal Stone Score”. Urology,2012,80(3):512-517.
[5]De la Rosette JJ, Zuazu JR, Tsakiris P, et al. Prognostic factors and percutaneous nephrolithotomy morbidity: a multivariate analysis of a contemporary series using the Clavien classification. J Urol,2008,180(6):2489-2493.
[6]Karakoyunlu AN, Cakici MC, Sari S, et al. Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotomy methods for management of bigsized kidney stones(≥4cm):single center retrospective study. Urol J,2019,16(3):232-235.
[7]Zhu M, Wang X, Shi Z, et al. Comparison between retrograde intrarenal surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotripsy in the management of renal stones: a metaanalysis. Exp Ther Med,2019,18(2):1366-1374.
[8]赵振华,赵国平,郑东升,等.输尿管软镜碎石术后尿脓毒血症的危险因素分析.中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版),2018,12(1):16-19.
[9]高小峰,李凌,彭泳涵,等.输尿管软镜联合钬激光治2～4cm肾结石疗效分析.微创泌尿外科杂志,2013,2(1):47-49.
[10]Kuo RL, Aslan P, Zhong P, et al.Impact of holmium laser settings and fiber diameter on stone fragmentation and endoscope deflection. J Endourol,1998,12(6):523-527.
[11]李尧,李权,何奇瑞,等.输尿管软镜下钬激光碎石术后输尿管石街形成的处理时机.中国微创外科杂志,2020,20(1):39-41.
[12]Fang L,Xie G,Zheng Z,et al.The effect of ratio of endoscopesheath diameter on intrapelvic pressure during flexible ureteroscopic lasertripsy. J Endourol,2019,33(2):132-139.
[13]肖博,靳松,姬超岳.国产一次性电子输尿管软镜在上尿路结石治疗中的初步应用经验.中华泌尿外科杂志,2020,41(8):609-612.
[14]胡力仁,范先明,林剑峰,等.可弯曲负压吸引鞘联合输尿管软镜治疗2～3 cm上尿路结石.中国微创外科杂志,2022,22(9):763-766.
[15]林剑峰,叶志彬,梁福律,等.一次性输尿管软镜在具有内镜损害高危因素上尿路结石手术中的初步应用.中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版),2022,16(3):220-223.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
*通讯作者，Email：fanxianmig666@yeah.net
更新日期/Last Update: 2023-12-01