-
近年来,随着腔内碎石器械的飞速发展及腔镜手术操作水平的不断提高,输尿管镜下钬激光碎石凭借其微创、效率高、残石率低等优点,已成为当前临床治疗输尿管中、下段结石的“标准术式”[1-3],但该术式在实际临床操作过程中易导致结石上移[4],如何采取简便、安全、经济、有效的方法防止结石上移或残留,已成为泌尿外科需要解决的问题。治疗输尿管中、下段结石病人,本文就改良的输尿管镜狄激光碎石术的手术效果及安全性作一探讨。
-
回顾性分析2014年11月至2017年12月我院泌尿外科收治的119例输尿管中、下段结石病人临床资料,其中男86例,女33例;年龄25~84岁。入选标准:(1)经影像学[腹部平片(KUB)、超声、CT及静脉肾盂造影(IVP)等]检查确诊为输尿管中、下段结石(单发输尿管阳性结石且仅位于一侧骶髂关节骨盆上缘以下);(2)结石直径>0.6~1.5 cm;(3)病人均签署知情同意书。排除标准:(1)不能耐受手术者;(2)术前尿路急性感染;(3)泌尿系狭窄或畸形;(4)凝血功能异常或合并严重心肺系疾病者;(5)孕妇与哺乳期妇女;(6)既往有同侧输尿管术史者。119例行输尿管中、下段结石病人中,60例采用常规输尿管镜钬激光碎石术(常规组),59例采取改良的输尿管镜钬激光碎石术(改良组)。2组病人年龄、性别、结石位置及结石最大直径等一般资料差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)(见表 1),具有可比性。
分组 n 年龄/岁 男 女 左侧 右侧 结石直径范围/mm 常规组 60 55.57±13.74 45 15 30 30 10.20±1.94 改良组 59 52.10±15.32 41 18 27 32 10.22±1.90 t — 1.30 0.45# 0.21# 0.06 P — >0.05 >0.05 >0.05 >0.05 #示χ2值 表 1 2组病人一般资料比较(x±s)
-
病人均行腰硬联合麻醉且取截石位,医用钬激光治疗机为合肥大族科瑞达激光设备有限公司的55 W钬激光发生器(型号:HANS-H55),斑马导丝(德国Urovision)(见图 1),输尿管镜采用wolf 8/9.8 F硬质输尿管镜(见图 2)结合电视影像监视系统(见图 3)。麻醉显效后,0.45%聚维酮碘常规消毒术区3遍,铺巾,灭菌后的0.9%氯化钠溶液挂于床头高处(约高于床头0.8 m),直视下经尿道置入F 8/9.8输尿管镜至膀胱。检查膀胱内壁是否存在新生肿块或结石,然后沿着输尿管间嵴探至患侧输尿管开口。
常规组:置入斑马导丝入患侧输尿管,斑马导丝引导下输尿管镜至患侧输尿管开口,输液延长管高压注水,同时上挑输尿管开口,使输尿管镜进入输尿管,逆行,发现结石(通常呈深黄色)行狄激光碎石术;设置钬激光能量0.8~1.5 J,频率5~20 Hz,将输尿管内结石完全“粉末化”,镜下留置斑马导丝,缓慢退镜,然后沿斑马导丝置入F5或F6双J管一根,患侧输尿管开口处留一环,置入F16导尿管一根,气囊注水约10 mL,引流淡红色尿液。
改良组:置入斑马导丝入患侧输尿管,180°旋转输尿管镜体使其倒置,摄像头方向保持不动,沿斑马导丝将输尿管镜推至患侧输尿管开口,输液延长管稍许注水,沿斑马导丝将倒置的输尿管镜推入输尿管,进入输尿管后,将输尿管镜镜体反方向旋转180°恢复原位(见图 4)。输尿管镜顺利进入病人输尿管管腔后,摇高手术床,病人呈脚低头高位(20°~30°),向上进镜,找见输尿管结石,观察结石大小、位置以及周边有无息肉包裹;狄激光碎石过程中调低输尿管镜进水流量,保证视野清晰即可;设置钬激光能量0.5~1.0 J,频率15~30 Hz。降低狄激光能量,提高其频率,采用“外周逐步削减法”逐步将输尿管内结石完全蚕食并粉末化(见图 5),碎石时注意降低进水压力及速度,监测病人血压及体温变化,将结石完全粉末化后,继续进镜达到肾盂输尿管连接部,镜下留置斑马导丝,缓慢退镜,然后沿斑马导丝置入F5或F6双J管一根,患侧输尿管开口处留一环,置入F16导尿管一根,气囊注水约10 mL,引流淡红色尿液。
-
术后经补液、抗感染、止血及抑酸处理后约8 h给予流质饮食,常规抗生素持续预防感染3 d,术后1 d可下床活动。行KUB检查是否存在残留结石以及双J管位置是否移位。常规停留尿管约2 d后拔管出院。双J管在术后约3周返回我院门诊进行拔除。
-
记录手术相关指标(包括碎石时间、总手术时间、一次性进镜率等);术后4周行腹部KUB平片复查,评价结石清除情况(以无结石或者结石最大直径≤4 mm为清除成功)并记录并发症(尿路感染、输尿管狭窄、急性肾盂肾炎等)发生情况;术后6个月超声探查肾积水恢复情况。
-
采用t检验和χ2检验。
-
2组一次进镜成功率差异具有统计学意义(P < 0.05);改良组进镜时间较常规组明显缩短(P < 0.01);改良组总手术时间均明显降低(P < 0.01);2组术后4周结石清除率差异有统计学意义(P < 0.01)(见表 2)。
分组 n 一次进镜成功 进镜时间/s 总手术时间/min 结石清除 常规组 60 50(83.3) 121.83±27.15 39.55±6.69 49(81.7) 改良组 59 57(96.6) 61.62±22.92 30.42±8.71 57(96.6) χ2 — 5.78 13.06* 6.41* 6.83 P — < 0.05 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 *示t值 表 2 2组病人手术相关指标比较[n; 百分率(%)]
-
2组术后并发症总发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)(见表 3)。
分组 n 急性膀胱炎 输尿管狭窄 积水增多 急性肾盂肾炎 并发症总发生 χ2 P 常规组 60 4(6.7) 1(1.7) 1(1.7) 1(1.7) 7(11.7) 3.26* >0.05 改良组 59 1(1.7) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 1(1.7) 合计 119 5(4.2) 1(0.8) 1(0.8) 1(0.8) 8(6.7) *示χ2矫正值 表 3 2组病人术后并发症发生率比较[n; 百分率(%)]
改良输尿管镜钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管中、下段结石的有效性和安全性分析
Analysis of the clinical efficacy and safety of modified ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy in the treatment of middle and lower ureteral stones
-
摘要:
目的探讨改良输尿管镜狄激光碎石术治疗输尿管中、下段结石的有效性和安全性。 方法选择119例输尿管中、下段结石病人临床资料,其中60例采用常规输尿管镜钬激光碎石术(常规组),59例采取改良的输尿管镜钬激光碎石术(改良组),观察2组一次进镜成功率、进镜时间、手术总时间、结石清除率及并发症发生情况。 结果常规组与改良组一次进镜成功率分别是83.3%和96.6%,2组差异具有统计学意义(P < 0.05);改良组进镜时间较常规组缩短(P < 0.05),总手术时间明显降低(P < 0.01);常规组与改良组术后4周的结石清除率分别为81.7%和96.6%,2组差异有统计学意义(P < 0.01);2组术后并发症总发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。 结论改良输尿管镜钬激光碎石术通过调整进镜方式、控制碎石的能量与频率、注意进水压力及速度能有效防止结石上移,利于结石清除,减少手术总时间,手术并发症发生率未见明显上升,进一步提升手术效果及安全性,值得临床推广。 Abstract:ObjectiveTo explore the clinical efficacy and safety of modified ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy in the treatment of middle and lower ureteral stones. MethodsThe clinical data of 119 patients with middle and lower ureteral stones were retrospectively analyzed.Sixty cases were treated with conventional ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy(conventional group), and 59 cases were treated with modified ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy(modified group).The success rate of one-time endoscopic entry, endoscopic entry time, total operation time, clearance rate of stone and complications were compared between two groups. ResultsThe success rates of one-time endoscopic entry in the conventional group and modified group were 83.3% and 96.6%, respectively, and the difference of which was statistically significant(P < 0.05).The endoscopic entry time in modified group was shorter than that in conventional group(P < 0.05), and the total operation time in modified group was significantly lower than that in conventional group(P < 0.01).The stone clearance rate in the conventional group and modified group after 4 weeks of operation were 81.7% and 96.6%, respectively, and the difference of which was statistically significant(P < 0.01).The incidence rate of postoperative complications was not statistically significant between two groups(P>0.05). ConclusionsThe modified ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy can effectively prevent the upward movement of stone through adjusting the way of endoscopic entry, controlling the energy and frequency of gravel and adjusting the inlet pressure and speed to facilitate the removal of stone, reduce the total operation time, not improve incidence rate of complications, and further improve the operation effect and safety, which is worthy of promotion in clinic. -
Key words:
- ureteral stones /
- ureteroscope /
- holmium laser
-
表 1 2组病人一般资料比较(x±s)
分组 n 年龄/岁 男 女 左侧 右侧 结石直径范围/mm 常规组 60 55.57±13.74 45 15 30 30 10.20±1.94 改良组 59 52.10±15.32 41 18 27 32 10.22±1.90 t — 1.30 0.45# 0.21# 0.06 P — >0.05 >0.05 >0.05 >0.05 #示χ2值 表 2 2组病人手术相关指标比较[n; 百分率(%)]
分组 n 一次进镜成功 进镜时间/s 总手术时间/min 结石清除 常规组 60 50(83.3) 121.83±27.15 39.55±6.69 49(81.7) 改良组 59 57(96.6) 61.62±22.92 30.42±8.71 57(96.6) χ2 — 5.78 13.06* 6.41* 6.83 P — < 0.05 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 *示t值 表 3 2组病人术后并发症发生率比较[n; 百分率(%)]
分组 n 急性膀胱炎 输尿管狭窄 积水增多 急性肾盂肾炎 并发症总发生 χ2 P 常规组 60 4(6.7) 1(1.7) 1(1.7) 1(1.7) 7(11.7) 3.26* >0.05 改良组 59 1(1.7) 0(0) 0(0) 0(0) 1(1.7) 合计 119 5(4.2) 1(0.8) 1(0.8) 1(0.8) 8(6.7) *示χ2矫正值 -
[1] SANTIAGO JE, HOLLANDER AB, SONI SD, et al. To dust or not to dust: a systematic review of ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy techniques[J]. Curr Urol Rep, 2017, 18(4): 32. doi: 10.1007/s11934-017-0677-8 [2] MATLAGA BR, CHEW B, EISNER B, et al. Ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy: a review of dusting vs fragmentation with extraction[J]. J Endourol, 2018, 32(1): 1. doi: 10.1089/end.2017.0641 [3] DEMIR A, KARADAČMA, CEÇEN K, et al. Pneumatic versus laser ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a comparison of initial outcomes and cost[J]. Int Urol Nephrol, 2014, 46(11): 2087. [4] ZENG G, WANG D, ZHANG T, et al. Modified access sheath for continuous flow ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a preliminary report of a novel concept and technique[J]. J Endourol, 2015, 30(9): 992. [5] ABOUTALEB H. Fluoroscopy free flexible ureteroscopy with holmium: yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser lithotripsy for removal of renal calculi[J]. Arab J Urol, 2016, 14(2): 123. doi: 10.1016/j.aju.2016.04.004 [6] LI J, XIAO J, HAN T, et al. Flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy for the treatment of upper urinary tract calculi in infants[J]. Exp Biol Med, 2017, 242(2): 153. [7] YOSHIOKA T, OTSUKI H, UEHARA S, et al. Effectiveness and safety of ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy for upper urinary tract calculi in elderly patients[J]. Acta Med Okayama, 2016, 70(3): 159. [8] JIANG JT, LI WG, ZHU YP, et al. Comparison of the clinical efficacy and safety of retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy and ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy in the treatment of obstructive upper ureteral calculi with concurrent urinary tract infections[J]. Lasers Med Sci, 2016, 31(5): 915. doi: 10.1007/s10103-016-1932-9 [9] CHOW GK, BLUTE ML, PATTERSON DE, et al. Ureteroscopy: update on current practice and long term complication[J]. J Urol, 2001, 165(2): 71. [10] 方友强, 王德娟, 吴杰英, 等. 两种碎石方法在输尿管镜钬激光碎石术中的疗效比较[J/CD]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2012, 6(5): 362. [11] 周治军, 徐康, 卢童, 等. 高频率低能量钬激光功率设置在软性输尿管镜治疗肾结石中的临床应用[J]. 临床外科杂志, 2017, 25(7): 540. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-6483.2017.07.020 [12] 於佶, 刘伟军, 李进, 等. 经尿道输尿管硬镜钬激光处理L4以上输尿管结石一期高碎石率[J]. 微创泌尿外科杂志, 2017, 6(3): 154.