期刊文献+

输尿管壁厚度对体外冲击波碎石效果预测价值的初步研究 被引量:1

Uretheral wall thickness as a predictor for stone-free rate after ESWL
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的:探讨输尿管壁厚度(UWT)对体外冲击波碎石(ESWL)术后结石清除率的预测价值。方法:选取我院2018年1月-2019年12月诊断为输尿管结石并行ESWL术治疗的患者为研究对象。按照ESWL术后碎石效果分为碎石清除组和结石残留组。比较两组患者术前临床资料和术后并发症发生率。多因素Logistics回归分析影响碎石效果的预测因子,采用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线评估其精确性及截点值。结果:所有患者ESWL术后结石清除率为74.83%(113/151)。两组患者在年龄、疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、结石病程、结石CT值及UWT,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05),而在性别、体重指数(BMI)、结石大小、位置等方面差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。多因素Logistic回归分析结石CT值及UWT可作为预测ESWL术后碎石效果的独立预测因子。ROC曲线比较ESWL术碎石效果的预测因子,UWT曲线下面积(AUC)最大(AUC=0.918,P<0.05),UWT最佳预测值为3.05 mm。低UWT组在ESWL术后非预期急诊手术低于高UWT组,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:结石CT值、UWT对ESWL术后结石清除率的独立预测因子,UWT对ESWL术碎石效果有较好的预测价值。 Objective:To explore the predictive value of uretheral wall thickness for stone-free rate after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy(ESWL).Methods:Patients who diagnosed as uretheral calculi and treated with ESWL from January 2018 to December 2019 in our hospital were selected as the research subjects.According to the stone-free rate after ESWL,they were divided into stone clearance group and stone remains group.To compare between the preoperative clinical data and postoperative complications of the two groups,the clinical predictors of stone-free rate was assessed using multivariate analyses.ROC curve was used to evaluate the accuracy and cutoff value.Results:Among the 151 patients,113(74.83%)excluded their stones after ESWL.There was no significant difference in gender,body mass index(BMI),stone size and location between the two groups,but there was a significant difference in age,visual analog score(VAS),stone course,stone CT value and UWT(P<0.05).Multivariate analysis showed that stone CT value and UWT could be used as independent predictors of ESWL.ROC analysis showed that 3.05 mm was the optimal cut-off value for UWT,with a predictive accuracy of0.918.In addition,low UWT had a significantly lower non-anticipated emergency surgery rate than high UWT(P<0.05).Conclusion:Stone CT value and UWT are independent predictors of stone clearance rate after ESWL.UWT has a better predictive value for ESWL.
作者 王芝千 朱晓东 郑安 王明清 王国栋 邵强 WANG Zhiqian;ZHU Xiaodong;ZHENG An;WANG Mingqing;WANG Guodong;SHAO Qiang(Department of Urology,Capital Medical University Electric Teaching Hospitaly Beijing 100073,China)
出处 《现代医学》 2021年第2期153-157,共5页 Modern Medical Journal
关键词 输尿管壁厚度 体外冲击波碎石 结石清除率 uretheral wall thickness extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy stone-free rate
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献11

  • 1Gonzalez Enquita C, Cabrera Perez J, Calahorra Fernandez F J, et al. Treatment of ureteral lithiasis with shock waves[J]. Arch Esp Urol, 2001,54 (9) : 971 -982.
  • 2Murshidi M S. Simple radiological indicators for staghorn calculi response to ESWL[J]. Int Urol Nephrol,2006,38(1) :69-73.
  • 3Wang S C, Hsu Y S, Chen K K, et al. Correlation between urinary tract pure stone composition and stone morphology on plain abdominal film[J]. J Chin Med Assoc, 2004,67(5) :235-238.
  • 4Sheir K Z, Mansour O, Madbouly K, et al. Determination pf the chemical composition of urinary calculi by noneontrast spiral computerized tomography[J]. Urol Res, 2005,33(2) :99-104.
  • 5Maqnuson W J, Tomera K M, Lance R S. Hounsfield unit density accurately predicts ESWL success[J].Alaska Med, 2005,47 (2) : 6 - 9.
  • 6Pareek G, Armenakas N A, Fracchia J A. Hounsfield unit on computerized tomography predict stone-free rates after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy[J]. J Urol,2003,169:1679-1681.
  • 7Ahn S H, Mayo-smith W W, Murphy B L, et al. Acute nontraumatic abdominal pain in adult patients: abdominal radiography compared with CT evaluation[J].Radiology, 2002,225 ( 1 ) : 159- 164.
  • 8吴舟,郑土康,田焕书,叶木石,黄兴端.大剂量静脉尿路造影在输尿管结石体外冲击波碎石中的应用研究[J].实用医学杂志,2011,27(14):2586-2588. 被引量:10
  • 9向阳,肖迪,孙永昌,王涛,尹国红.输尿管镜气压弹道碎石术与体外冲击波碎石术治疗输尿管结石的疗效比较与选择[J].临床泌尿外科杂志,2011,26(11):861-863. 被引量:63
  • 10方平,郑少波,徐亚文,杨青.气压弹道碎石与体外冲击波碎石治疗输尿管结石的疗效比较[J].中国老年学杂志,2012,32(9):1931-1932. 被引量:11

共引文献27

同被引文献7

引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部