首页> 外文OA文献 >Clinical comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in treating renal calculi.
【2h】

Clinical comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in treating renal calculi.

机译:体外冲击波碎石术和经皮肾镜取石术治疗肾结石的临床比较。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for efficacy in treating renal calculi. DESIGN: Non-randomised multicentre cohort study with 3 month follow up and 13 month data collection period. SETTING: Lithotripter centre in London, tertiary referral hospital, and urological clinics in several secondary and tertiary care centres. PATIENTS: 933 of 1001 patients treated by lithotripsy at the lithotripter centre were compared with 195 treated by nephrolithotomy. Missing patients were due to incomplete collection of data. Age and sex distributions and characteristics of the stones were similar in the two treatment groups. Two patients died in the lithotripsy group. Three month follow up was achieved in about 84% of both groups (783/933 for lithotripsy; 163/195 for nephrolithotomy). INTERVENTIONS: The nephrolithotomy group had surgical nephrolithotomy alone. In the lithotripsy group 83% (774/933) had lithotripsy alone, 11% (103/933) had combined lithotripsy and nephrolithotomy, and 6% (56/933) had lithotripsy plus ureteroscopy. Single and combined lithotripter treatments were analysed as one group and compared with nephrolithotomy. END POINT: Presence of stones three months after treatment. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Presence of residual stones was assessed by plain radiography, ultrasonography, or intravenous urography. After adjustment for age and size and position of stone for patients with single stones the likelihood of being free of stones three months after treatment was significantly greater in the nephrolithotomy group than the lithotripsy group (odds ratio 6.6; 95% confidence interval 3.0 to 14.6) and the response was particularly pronounced with staghorn calculi (62% (8/13) v 15% (141/96) patients free of stones after nephrolithotomy and lithotripsy, respectively). OTHER FINDINGS: 19%(146/775) of patients who had had lithotripsy had to be readmitted within three months after treatment compared with 14%(23/162) who had nephrolithotomy; and 64%(94/146) of readmissions after lithotripsy were for complications compared with 30%(7/23) of readmissions after nephrolithotomy. CONCLUSIONS: Nephrolithotomy may be preferable to lithotripsy for treating renal stones and it may not be wise to invest heavily in lithotripsy facilities.
机译:目的:比较体外冲击波碎石术和经皮肾镜取石术治疗肾结石的疗效。设计:非随机多中心队列研究,随访3个月,数据收集期13个月。地点:伦敦的碎石机中心,三级转诊医院以及几个二级和三级护理中心的泌尿外科诊所。患者:在碎石术中心接受碎石术治疗的1001例患者中,有933例与肾镜取石术治疗的195例患者进行了比较。缺少患者是由于数据收集不完整。两个治疗组的年龄,性别分布和结石特征相似。碎石术组有2例患者死亡。两组中约84%进行了三个月的随访(碎石术为783/933,肾镜取石术为163/195)。干预:肾镜取石术组仅接受手术肾镜取石术。碎石术组中83%(774/933)单独进行碎石术,11%(103/933)合并碎石术和肾镜取石术,6%(56/933)进行碎石术加输尿管镜检查。将单个碎石术和联合碎石术治疗作为一组进行分析,并与肾镜取石术进行比较。终点:治疗三个月后出现结石。测量和主要结果:通过平片,超声或静脉内泌尿造影评估残留结石的存在。调整了单块结石患者的年龄,结石大小和位置后,在肾结石切除术组治疗三个月后无结石的可能性明显大于碎石术组(优势比为6.6; 95%置信区间为3.0至14.6)鹿角结石的反应尤为明显(分别在肾镜取石术和碎石术后无结石的患者中占62%(8/13)对15%(141/96)患者)。其他发现:接受碎石术的患者中有19%(146/775)在治疗后3个月内必须重新入院,而接受肾镜取石术的患者中有14%(23/162)需再次入院。碎石术后再入院的64%(94/146)为并发症,而肾镜取石术后再入院的为30%(7/23)。结论:肾结石切开术可能比碎石术更适合治疗肾结石,对碎石术设施进行大量投资可能并不明智。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号