论文部分内容阅读
目的:分析并讨论输尿管镜碎石术联合体外冲击波碎石治疗较大肾盂结石的结果及其是否出现并发症。方法:选取2010年9月至2012年9月我院收治的肾盂结石的患者90例作为研究对象。随机分为选用输尿管镜碎石术联合体外冲击波碎石治疗的观察组和只选用输尿管镜碎石术治疗的对照组。两组患者均采用常规止痛、解痉、补液、抗炎等治疗,在进行碎石术治疗后的七天后观察患者的临床症状作出疗效判断。比较两组患者的疗效。结果:治疗后,两组患者的结石均有排出,但是观察组与对照组有明显差异,观察组的成功排石人数比对照组高26.78%,P<0.05,具有统计学意义。部分患者在治疗的过程中出现了一系列并发症,涉及全身多个系统,最典型的有血尿,肾绞痛,消化道出血等情况产生,其中对照组的并发症明显多于观察组,对照组的并发症发生率比观察组高31.11%,两组比较差异明显,P<0.05,具有统计学意义。结论:输尿管镜碎石术联合体外冲击波碎石治疗较大肾盂结石相较于传统的开放式治疗方法有良好的效果,患者普遍满意,虽然花费相对较高,但是痛苦少,副作用小,感染率小,无创伤,还是值得在临床上广泛推广。
OBJECTIVE: To analyze and discuss the results of ureteroscopic lithotripsy combined with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the treatment of large renal pelvis and its complications. Methods: Totally 90 patients with renal pelvis who were treated in our hospital from September 2010 to September 2012 were selected as the research object. Randomly divided into the use of ureteroscopic lithotripsy combined with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy observation group and only selected ureteroscopic lithotripsy treatment group. The two groups of patients were treated with routine analgesic, antispasmodic, rehydration, anti-inflammatory and so on. The clinical symptoms of the patients were observed seven days after the lithotripsy. Compare the efficacy of two groups of patients. Results: After treatment, stones were discharged in both groups, but there was a significant difference between the observation group and the control group. The number of successful stones in the observation group was 26.78% higher than that in the control group (P <0.05), which was statistically significant. Some patients in the course of treatment appeared a series of complications involving multiple body system, the most typical hematuria, renal colic, gastrointestinal bleeding and so on, of which the control group complications were significantly more than the observation group, control The incidence of complications in the group was 31.11% higher than that in the observation group. There was significant difference between the two groups (P <0.05), which was statistically significant. Conclusions: Ureteroscopic lithotripsy combined with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the treatment of larger pelvic masses has good results compared with the traditional open treatment method. Patients are generally satisfied. Although the cost is relatively high, it has less pain, fewer side effects and lower infection rate Small, non-invasive, or worthy of widespread clinical promotion.