Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the management of impacted, large, proximal ureteral stones

被引:18
作者
Juan, Yung-Shun [1 ]
Shen, Jung-Tsung [1 ]
Li, Ching-Chia [2 ]
Wang, Chii-Jye [1 ,4 ]
Chuang, Shu-Mien [3 ]
Huang, Chun-Hsiung [2 ,4 ]
Wu, Wen-Jeng [2 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Kaohsiung Municipal Hsiaokang Hosp, Dept Urol, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
[2] Kaohsiung Med Univ Hosp, Dept Urol, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
[3] Kaohsiung Med Univ, Dept Anat, Fac Med, Coll Med, Kaohsiung 807, Taiwan
[4] Kaohsiung Med Univ, Dept Urol, Fac Med, Coll Med, Kaohsiung 807, Taiwan
关键词
percutaneous nephroscopy; ureteral stone; ureteroscopy;
D O I
10.1016/S1607-551X(08)70118-9
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
The optimal treatment for large, impacted, proximal ureteral stones remains controversial. We report our experience and compare treatment outcomes in patients with single, impacted, proximal ureteral stones undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL). Between January 2005 and January 2006, a total of 53 consecutive patients with solitary, impacted, proximal ureteral stones > 15 mm in diameter who had undergone PCNL or URSL treatments were enrolled in this study. The mean age was 48.5 +/- 11.8 years. PCNL and URSL were performed in 22 and 31 patients. Stone burdens in the PCNL and URSL groups were 232.8 +/- 113.2 mm(2) and 150.3 +/- 70.3 mm(2), respectively. The efficiency quotient (EQ) for the PCNL and URSL groups was 0.95 and 0.67, respectively. The stone-free rate at the 1 month follow-up was 95.4% in the PCNL group and 58% in the URSL group (p < 0.001). Two patients in the PCNL group had blood loss requiring transfusion. Eight patients had stones showing upward migration during the URSL procedure, and these stones were subsequently treated by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and PCNL. For an impacted, proximal ureteral stone > 15 mm in diameter, PCNL had better stone-free rates and could simultaneously treat coexisting renal stones. However, URSL had the advantages of shorter operative times, shorter postoperative hospital stays, and fewer postoperative complications.
引用
收藏
页码:204 / 208
页数:5
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]  
BUSH WH, 1986, AM J ROENTGENOL, V147, P89, DOI 10.2214/ajr.147.1.89
[2]   EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCK-WAVE LITHOTRIPSY (ESWL) FOR TREATMENT OF UROLITHIASIS [J].
CHAUSSY, C ;
SCHMIEDT, E ;
JOCHAM, D ;
SCHULLER, J ;
BRANDL, H ;
LIEDL, B .
UROLOGY, 1984, 23 :59-66
[3]   1ST CLINICAL-EXPERIENCE WITH EXTRACORPOREALLY INDUCED DESTRUCTION OF KIDNEY-STONES BY SHOCK-WAVES [J].
CHAUSSY, C ;
SCHMIEDT, E ;
JOCHAM, D ;
BRENDEL, W ;
FORSSMANN, B ;
WALTHER, V .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1982, 127 (03) :417-420
[4]   The stone cone: A new generation of basketry [J].
Dretler, SP .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2001, 165 (05) :1593-1596
[5]   Percutaneous antegrade removal of impacted upper-ureteral calculi: Still the treatment of choice in developing countries [J].
Goel, R ;
Aron, M ;
Kesarwani, PK ;
Dogra, PN ;
Hemal, AK ;
Gupta, NP .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2005, 19 (01) :54-57
[6]   Ureteroscopy and pneumatic lithotripsy, followed by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for the treatment of distal ureteral stones [J].
Gurbuz, ZG ;
Gonen, M ;
Fazlioglu, A ;
Akbulut, H .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2002, 9 (08) :441-444
[7]   Experience with ureteral stone management in 1,082 patients using semirigid ureteroscopes [J].
Hamano, S ;
Nomura, H ;
Kinsui, H ;
Oikawa, T ;
Suzuki, N ;
Tanaka, M ;
Murakami, S ;
Igarashi, T ;
Ito, H .
UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS, 2000, 65 (02) :106-111
[8]   Shock wave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopy for distal ureteral calculi:: a prospective study [J].
Honeck, P. ;
Häcker, A. ;
Alken, P. ;
Michel, M. S. ;
Knoll, T. .
UROLOGICAL RESEARCH, 2006, 34 (03) :190-192
[9]  
Hussain Manzoor, 1997, JPMA (Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association), V47, P159
[10]  
Juan Yung-Shun, 2006, Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences, V22, P99