输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术与气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效对比

Comparison on the Curative Effect of Ureteroscopic Holmium Laser Lithotripsy and Pneumatic Lithotripsy in the Treatment of Ureteral Calculi

目的分析输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术与气压弹道碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效。方法选取2016年3月至2018年3月期间我院收治的输尿管结石患者230例,按照不同治疗方法分为钬激光组(n=117)和弹道组(n=113)。弹道组采用气压弹道碎石术治疗,钬激光组采用输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治疗。对比两组患者的手术相关指标、碎石成功率以及不良反应发生率。结果钬激光组的手术时间、结石排净时间、术后住院时间均明显短于弹道组(P <0.05)。钬激光组的碎石成功率为98.29%,明显高于弹道组的87.61%(P <0.05)。两组患者的不良反应发生率比较无统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论与气压弹道碎石术相比,输尿管镜下钬激光碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效更佳,值得临床推广应用。

Objective To analyze the curative effect of ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy and pneumatic lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral calculi. Methods 230 cases of patients with ureteral calculi admitted to our hospital from March 2016 to March 2018 were selected and divided into holmium laser group（n = 117） and pneumatic group（n = 113） according to different treatment methods. The pneumatic group received pneumatic lithotripsy, while the holmium laser group received ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy. The related operation indicators, lithotripsy success rate and incidence of adverse reactions were compared between the two groups. Results The operation time, calculi clearance time and postoperative hospitalization time of the holmium laser group were significantly shorter than those of the pneumatic group（P 0.05）. The lithotripsy success rate of the holmium laser group was 98.29%, significantly higher than 87.61% of the pneumatic group（P 0.05）. No statistical difference was found in the incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups（P 0.05）.Conclusions Compared with pneumatic lithotripsy, ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy has better curative effect in the treatment of ureteral calculi, which is worthy of clinical promotion and application.