| 摘要: |
| ［摘要］ 目的 比较可弯曲负压吸引鞘与智能控压吸引鞘在输尿管软镜激光碎石取石术中治疗<2 cm上尿路结石的效果。方法 招募2023年6月至2024年6月玉林市第一人民医院收治的<2 cm上尿路结石患者160例，采用随机数字表法将其分为A组（接受可弯曲负压吸引鞘联合输尿管软镜激光碎石取石术治疗）和B组（接受智能控压吸引鞘联合输尿管软镜激光碎石取石术治疗），各80例。比较两组手术时间、结石清除率、住院时间及术后白细胞计数（WBC）、C反应蛋白（CRP）、降钙素原（PCT）水平。记录两组并发症发生情况。结果 B组手术时间短于A组，术后WBC、CRP水平低于A组，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。两组住院时间及术后PCT水平比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。A组术后1个月的结石清除率显著高于B组（83.75% vs 70.00%； χ2=4.254，P=0.039），但两组术后3个月的结石清除率比较差异无统计学意义（93.75% vs 88.75%； χ2=1.252，P=0.263）。两组术后并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论 在输尿管软镜激光碎石取石术中应用可弯曲负压吸引鞘和智能控压吸引鞘治疗<2 cm上尿路结石均安全有效。智能控压吸引鞘在缩短手术时间、控制术后炎症方面优于可弯曲负压吸引鞘。 |
| 关键词: 可弯曲负压吸引鞘 智能控压吸引鞘 输尿管软镜激光碎石取石术 上尿路结石 |
| DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1674-3806.2025.09.16 |
| 分类号:R 691.4 |
| 基金项目:广西科技重大专项（编号：桂科AA22096030）；广西卫生健康委科研课题（编号：Z-K20231770） |
|
| Comparison of effects of flexible negative pressure aspiration sheath and intelligent pressure-controlled aspiration sheath respectively combined with ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy and stone extraction in treatment of upper urinary tract stones smaller than 2 cm |
|
LIU Mingqi, LIANG Bin, ZHANG Zhenqiang, DANG Bowen, LIU Xingze, YE Jinhan, HUANG Beiyuan, CHEN Guan, TAN Baofei, PANG Guijian, XU Wei, LIU Chengbei
|
|
Department of Urology, the First People′s Hospital of Yulin(the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University), Yulin 537000, China
|
| Abstract: |
| ［Abstract］ Objective To compare the effects of flexible negative pressure aspiration sheath and intelligent pressure-controlled aspiration sheath respectively combined with ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy and stone extraction in treatment of upper urinary tract stones smaller than 2 cm. Methods A total of 160 patients with upper urinary tract stones smaller than 2 cm who were admitted to the First People′s Hospital of Yulin from June 2023 to June 2024 were recruited and divided into group A(receiving flexible negative pressure aspiration sheath combined with ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy and stone extraction) and group B(receiving intelligent pressure-controlled aspiration sheath combined with ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy and stone extraction) by using random number table method, with 80 patients in each group. The operation time, stone clearance rate, length of hospital stay and the levels of postoperative white blood cell count(WBC), C-reactive protein(CRP) and procalcitonin(PCT) were compared between the two groups. The occurrence of complications was recorded in the two groups. Results The operation time in group B was shorter than that in group A, and the postoperative WBC and CRP levels in group B were lower than those in group A, and the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the length of hospital stay and postoperative PCT level between the two groups(P>0.05). The stone clearance rate in group A was significantly higher than that in group B at 1 month after the operation(83.75% vs 70.00%; χ2=4.254, P=0.039), but there was no statistically significant difference in the stone clearance rate between the two groups at 3 months after the operation(93.75% vs 88.75%; χ2=1.252, P=0.263). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups(P>0.05). Conclusion The applications of flexible negative pressure aspiration sheath and intelligent pressure-controlled aspiration sheath in ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy and stone extraction are safe and effective in treatment of upper urinary tract stones smaller than 2 cm. Intelligent pressure-controlled aspiration sheath combined with ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy and stone extraction is superior to flexible negative pressure aspiration sheath combined with ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy and stone extraction in shortening the operation time and controlling postoperative inflammation. |
| Key words: Flexible negative pressure aspiration sheath Intelligent pressure-controlled aspiration sheath Ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy and stone extraction Upper urinary tract stones |
