后腹腔镜下输尿管切开取石术和输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管上段结石临床效果对比分析

The clinical efficacy of retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy versus that ofureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy for upper ureteral calculi

目的对比研究后腹腔镜下输尿管切开取石术和输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管上段结石的临床效果，为临床治疗方法的选择提供指导。方法随机将2009年12月至2010年12月于我院接受输尿管上段结石治疗的112例患者平均分为A组和B组。A组行后腹腔镜下输尿管切开取石术，B组行输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术，比较两种方法治疗效果和并发症情况。结果A组手术成功率为92．86％，显著高于B组（62．50％），差异具有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。两组患者术中、术后并发症情况差异均无统计学意义（p〉0．05）。结论与输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术比较，后腹腔镜下输尿管切开取石术具有成功率高的特点，且手术损伤小、术后恢复快、无严重并发症，值得在临床推广使用。

Objective To compare the efficacy of retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy with that of ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy for upper ureteral calculi, and provide clinical guidance for choices of treatmenL Methods 112 patients who received treatment for upper ureteral calculi during the pe- riod of December 2009 to December 2010 in our hospital were randomly divided into two groups. Group A un- derwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy, while group B group received ureteroscopic pneumatic ｜ithotripsy. The efficacy of the two procedures and the related complications were com- pared between the two groups. Results The success rate of the procedure was significantly higher in group A （ 92.86% ） than in group B （ 62.5% ）, with a statistical significance （ P 〈 0.05 ）. The rate of intraoperative or postoperative complications did not differ statistically between the two groups （ P 〉 0.05）. Conclusions Retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy, as compared with ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy, has a higher success rate, less surgical damage, rapid postoperative recovery, and no serious complications. It is worth popularizing clinically.