不同治疗方案对于临界性肾结石的疗效对比分析

摘要

Objective Observation of ESWL, PCNL with FURS three methods curative effect for the treatment of the criticality(15~25 mm)kidney stones. Methods Our hospital from 2013 to 2015 of the 90 cases of patients with the criticality kidney stones, according to the size and location of the stone pair were randomly divided into A, B, C three groups. Each group of 30 cases. Respectively treated by ESWL,PCNL and FURS. Results Stone clearance rate, complications of three groups of patients, serum creatinine and urea nitrogen in comparison, P<0.05, differences are statistically significant. Conclusion For the treatment of the criticality kidney stones, FURS with stone clearance rate and high safety, low complication rate.%目的：对比观察 ESWL、PCNL 与 FURS 三种方法治疗临界性（15～25 mm）肾结石的疗效。方法对2013年～2015年我院收治的90例临界性肾结石患者，按结石的位置和大小配对随机分为 A、B、C 三组，每组各30例，分别行 ESWL、PCNL 和 FURS 治疗。结果三组患者的结石清除率、并发症、血肌酐和尿素氮相比较，P ＜0.05，有统计学意义。结论对于临界性肾结石的治疗，FURS 术具有结石清除率和安全性高，并发症发生率低等优势。