主动迁移技术与原位碎石技术在输尿管软镜治疗1~2 cm输尿管上段结石中的安全性和有效性比较

doi:10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2023.03.024

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的: 比较在逆行输尿管软镜治疗1~2 cm输尿管上段结石过程中应用主动迁移技术与原位碎石技术的安全性和有效性。方法: 选取2018年8月至2020年8月北京友谊医院泌尿科收治的1~2 cm输尿管上段结石患者为研究对象，共90例。采用随机数字表法将患者分为原位碎石技术组(A组)45例和主动迁移技术组(B组)45例。所谓主动迁移技术是通过体位变化、水流冲刷、激光冲击或网篮移位等手段的辅助，将结石重新放置于便于碎石的肾盏内，再进行激光碎石和取石。收集患者术前、术中和术后的数据，进行统计分析。结果: A组患者年龄(51.6±14.1)岁，其中男性34例、女性11例；结石直径为(1.48±0.24) cm，结石密度(897.8±175.9) Hu；结石位于左侧26例、右侧19例；肾积水程度：无肾积水8例，Ⅰ度肾积水20例，Ⅱ度肾积水11例，Ⅲ度肾积水6例。B组患者年龄(51.8±13.7)岁，其中男性30例、女性15例；结石直径(1.52±0.22) cm，结石密度(964.6±214.2) Hu；结石位于左侧22例、右侧23例；肾积水程度：无肾积水10例，Ⅰ度肾积水23例，Ⅱ度肾积水8例，Ⅲ度肾积水4例。两组患者的一般参数和结石指标差异均无统计学意义。A组和B组患者手术时间分别为(67.1±16.9) min和(72.2±14.8) min，碎石时间分别为(38.0±13.2) min和(40.6±12.6) min，两组间差异均无统计学意义。术后4周A组和B组清石率分别为86.7%和97.8%，差异亦无统计学意义。并发症方面，A组出现血尿25例、疼痛16例、膀胱痉挛10例、轻度发热4例，B组出现血尿22例、疼痛13例、膀胱痉挛12例、轻度发热2例，两组差异无统计学意义。结论: 应用主动迁移技术治疗1~2 cm的输尿管上段结石具有良好的安全性和有效性。

关键词: 输尿管结石, 输尿管软镜, 碎石术, 主动迁移技术, 治疗结果

Abstract:

Objective: To compare the safety and effectiveness of active migration technique and in situ lithotripsy technique in the treatment of 1-2 cm upper ureteral calculi by retrograde flexible ureteroscopy. Methods: A total of 90 patients with 1-2 cm upper ureteral calculi treated in the urology department of Beijing Friendship Hospital from August 2018 to August 2020 were selected as the subjects. The patients were divided into two groups using random number table: 45 patients in group A were treated with in situ lithotripsy and 45 patients in group B were treated with active migration technique. The active migration technique was to reposition the stones in the renal calyces convenient for lithotripsy with the help of body position change, water flow scouring, laser impact or basket displacement, and then conduct laser lithotripsy and stone extraction. The data of the patients before and after operation were collected and statistically analyzed. Results: The age of the patients in group A was (51.6±14.1) years, including 34 males and 11 females. The stone diameter was (1.48±0.24) cm, and the stone density was (897.8±175.9) Hu. The stones were located on the left in 26 cases and on the right in 19 cases. There were 8 cases with no hydronephrosis, 20 cases with grade Ⅰ hydronephrosis, 11 cases with grade Ⅱ hydronephrosis, and 6 cases with grade Ⅲ hydronephrosis. The age of the patients in group B was (51.8±13.7) years, including 30 males and 15 females. The stone diameter was (1.52±0.22) cm, and the stone density was (964.6±214.2) Hu. The stones were located on the left in 22 cases and on the right in 23 cases. There were 10 cases with no hydronephrosis, 23 cases with grade Ⅰ hydronephrosis, 8 cases with grade Ⅱ hydronephrosis, and 4 cases with grade Ⅲ hydronephrosis. There was no significant diffe-rence in general parameters and stone indexes between the two groups. The operation time of group A was (67.1±16.9) min and the lithotripsy time was (38.0±13.2) min. The operation time of group B was (72.2±14.8) min and the lithotripsy time was (40.6±12.6) min. There was no significant difference between the two groups. Four weeks after operation, the stone-free rate in group A was 86.7%, and in group B was 97.8%. There was no significant difference between the two groups. In terms of complications, 25 cases of hematuria, 16 cases of pain, 10 cases of bladder spasm and 4 cases of mild fever occurred in group A. There were 22 cases of hematuria, 13 cases of pain, 12 cases of bladder spasm and 2 cases of mild fever in group B. There was no significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion: Active migration technique is safe and effective in the treatment of 1-2 cm upper ureteral calculi.

Key words: Ureteral calculi, Flexible ureteroscopy, Lithotripsy, Active migration technique, Treatment outcome

中图分类号:

R693.4

王磊,韩天栋,江卫星,李钧,张道新,田野. 主动迁移技术与原位碎石技术在输尿管软镜治疗1~2 cm输尿管上段结石中的安全性和有效性比较[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2023, 55(3): 553-557.

Lei WANG,Tian-dong HAN,Wei-xing JIANG,Jun LI,Dao-xin ZHANG,Ye TIAN. Comparison of safety and effectiveness of active migration technique and in situ lithotripsy technique in the treatment of 1-2 cm upper ureteral calculi by flexible ure-teroscopy[J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2023, 55(3): 553-557.

图/表 2

表1

表2

参考文献 11

1	Drake T , Grivas N , Dabestani S , et al. What are the benefits and harms of ureteroscopy compared with shock-wave lithotripsy in the treatment of upper ureteral stones? A systematic review[J]. Eur Urol, 2017, 72 (5): 772- 786. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.04.016
2	Sun XW , Xia SJ , Lu J , et al. Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: Randomized comparison of percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy[J]. J Endourol, 2008, 22 (5): 913- 917. doi: 10.1089/end.2007.0230
3	Allameh F , Razzaghi M , Fallah-Karkan M , et al. Comparison of stone retrieval basket, stone cone and holmium laser: Which one is better in retropulsion and stone-free status for patients with upper ureteral calculi?[J]. J Lasers Med Sci, 2019, 10 (3): 179- 184. doi: 10.15171/jlms.2019.28
4	Abedi G , Monga M . Flexible ureteroscopy for treatment of upper urinary tract calculus[J]. J Endourol, 2021, 35 (S2): S56- S61. doi: 10.1089/end.2020.1018
5	Legemate JD , Wijnstok NJ , Matsuda T , et al. Characteristics and outcomes of ureteroscopic treatment in 2 650 patients with impacted ureteral stones[J]. World J Urol, 2017, 35 (10): 1497- 1506. doi: 10.1007/s00345-017-2028-2
6	Wu WS , Zhang JQ , Yi RXT , et al. Cost-effectiveness of anti-retropulsive devices varies according to the locations of proximal ureteral stones: A retrospective cohort study[J]. BMC Urol, 2022, 22 (1): 43. doi: 10.1186/s12894-022-00995-9
7	Galal EM , Anwar AZ , El-Bab TKF , et al. Retrospective comparative study of rigid and flexible ureteroscopy for treatment of proximal ureteral stones[J]. Int Braz J Urol, 2016, 42 (5): 967- 972. doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2015.0644
8	Pan JH , Xue W , Xia L , et al. Ureteroscopic lithotripsy in trendelenburg position for proximal ureteral calculi: A prospective, randomized, comparative study[J]. Int Urol Nephrol, 2014, 46 (10): 1895- 1901. doi: 10.1007/s11255-014-0732-z
9	Jung W , Byun HJ , Lee DS . The role of antegrade irrigation via percutaneous nephrostomy on surgical outcomes in semirigid ure-teroscopy among patients with upper ureteral stones[J]. Biomed Res Int, 2019, 2019, 8657609.
10	Elgebaly O , Abdeldayem H , Idris F , et al. Antegrade mini-percutaneous flexible ureteroscopy versus retrograde ureteroscopy for treating impacted proximal ureteric stones of 1-2 cm: A prospective randomised study[J]. Arab J Urol, 2020, 18 (3): 176- 180. doi: 10.1080/2090598X.2020.1769385
11	Chen YC , Chen HW , Juan YS , et al. Management of large proximal ureteral calculi: A three-year multicenter experience of simultaneous supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde ure-terolithotripsy[J]. Urol J, 2019, 16 (5): 433- 438.

相关文章 15

[1]	李伟浩, 张学民, 李伟, 张韬, 张小明. 胸主动脉腔内修复术左肱动脉穿刺点使用血管缝合器处理的临床效果[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2026, 58(2): 388-392.
[2]	FarinEbrahimi, 冯志强, FarazEbrahimi, 韩玮华, 于子杨, 贾宽宽, 安金刚. 上颌药物相关性颌骨坏死的不同分期手术治疗效果[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2026, 58(1): 107-114.
[3]	潘莲菲, 李文静, 王瑞洋, 焦剑, 曹战强, 高丽, 释栋. 口服抗生素辅助牙周机械治疗对重度牙周炎的短期疗效及影响因素[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2026, 58(1): 30-36.
[4]	余霄腾, 黄奕瑄, 李新飞, 陈昶甫, 赵方舟, 应鸿刚, 陶子豪, 张一鸣, 徐丽清, 李志华, 杨昆霖, 周利群, 李学松, 赵峥. 结石相关输尿管狭窄的上尿路修复手术技术与临床结局[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2025, 57(4): 670-675.
[5]	冀竞辉, 林秀石, 潘大猛, 吴芝莹, 薛子璇, 田晓军, 张树栋, 王滨帅, 邱敏. 输尿管硬镜联合勺状阻石篮激光碎石术治疗输尿管1.5 cm及以上结石的效果[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2025, 57(4): 676-683.
[6]	康一帆, 葛严军, 吕晓鸣, 谢尚, 单小峰, 蔡志刚. 即刻种植体支持式义齿修复的血管化髂骨瓣重建下颌骨缺损[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2025, 57(1): 78-84.
[7]	李文菁,张保宙,李恒,赖良鹏,杜辉,孙宁,龚晓峰,李莹,王岩,武勇. 胫距跟融合治疗终末期踝和后足病变的中短期临床结果[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2024, 56(2): 299-306.
[8]	邹雪,白小娟,张丽卿. 艾拉莫德联合托法替布治疗难治性中重度类风湿关节炎的疗效[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2023, 55(6): 1013-1021.
[9]	薛蔚,董樑,钱宏阳,费笑晨. 前列腺癌新辅助治疗与辅助治疗的现状及进展[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2023, 55(5): 775-780.
[10]	邱敏,宗有龙,王滨帅,杨斌,徐楚潇,孙争辉,陆敏,赵磊,卢剑,刘承,田晓军,马潞林. 腹腔镜肾部分切除术治疗中高复杂程度肾肿瘤的效果[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2023, 55(5): 833-837.
[11]	秦彩朋,王飞,杜依青,张晓威,李清,刘士军,徐涛. 无症状无积水输尿管结石4例患者的诊治[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2023, 55(5): 939-942.
[12]	柳登高,郑丹妮,赵雅宁,张亚琼,叶欣,张丽琪,谢晓艳,张雷,张祖燕,俞光岩. 疑难唾液腺结石病的治疗研究[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2023, 55(1): 8-12.
[13]	张春龙,王明瑞,王起,许克新,徐涛,胡浩. 覆膜金属输尿管支架维持性治疗输尿管镜碎石术后难治性输尿管狭窄的远期疗效评价[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2022, 54(4): 674-679.
[14]	李伟浩,李伟,张学民,李清乐,焦洋,张韬,蒋京军,张小明. 去分支杂交手术和传统手术治疗胸腹主动脉瘤的结果比较[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2022, 54(1): 177-181.
[15]	朱正达,高岩,何汶秀,方鑫,刘洋,魏攀,闫志敏,华红. 红色诺卡氏菌细胞壁骨架治疗糜烂型口腔扁平苔藓的疗效及安全性[J]. 北京大学学报（医学版）, 2021, 53(5): 964-969.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Variable	Group A (n=45)	Group B (n=45)	P
Age/years, ${\bar x}$±s	51.6±14.1	51.8±13.7	0.975
Gender, n(%)			0.865
Male	34 (75.6)	30 (66.7)
Female	11 (24.4)	15 (33.3)
Stone criteria, ${\bar x}$±s
Size/cm	1.48±0.24	1.52±0.22	0.489
Density/Hu	897.8±175.9	964.6±214.2	0.092
Laterality, n(%)			0.714
Left	26 (57.8)	22 (48.9)
Right	19 (42.2)	23 (51.1)
Hydronephrosis, n(%)			0.290
No	8 (17.8)	10 (22.2)
Grade Ⅰ	20 (44.4)	23 (51.1)
Grade Ⅱ	11 (24.4)	8 (17.8)
Grade Ⅲ	6 (13.3)	4 (8.9)

Variable	Group A	Group B	P
Operative time/min, ${\bar x}$±s	67.1±16.9	72.2±14.8	0.633
Lithotripsy time/min, ${\bar x}$±s	38.0±13.2	40.6±12.6	0.757
Residual stone, n(%)			0.110
No	39 (86.7)	44 (97.8)
Yes	6 (13.3)	1 (2.2)
Complications, n(%)
Haematuria	25 (55.6)	22 (48.9)	0.527
Pain (mild to moderate)	16 (35.6)	13 (28.9)	0.499
Bladder irritative symptoms	10 (22.2)	12 (26.7)	0.624
Low-grade fever	4 (8.9)	2 (4.4)	0.677