2018国际医药卫生导报Requires access

Ureteroscopic lithotripsy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in treatment of renal calculi

Qingyan Yang, Chang’an Wang, Tao Li, Jianle Han, Shuai-ping Yang, Junwei Yang

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective To explore the clinical effects of ureteroscopic lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of renal calculi. Methods 85 cases of renal calculi treated at our hospital were randomly divided into a control group (n=42) and an observation group (n=43). The control group were treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and the observation group with ureteroscopic lithotomy. The stone clearance rate, intraoperative bleeding volume, operation time, complication rate, and quality of life were compared between the two groups. Results The stone clearance rate in the observation group was 90.70% (39/43), while that in the control group was 92.86% (39/42), with no statistical difference between the two groups (P>0.05) . The operation time was longer and the bleeding volume was lower in the observation group than in the control group, with statistical difference (P<0.05) . The complication rate was lower in the observation group than in the control group [2.33% (1/43) vs. 19.05% (8/42), P<0.05]. Conclusion Ureteroscopic lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy both are effective in treating renal calculi, but the former has lower bleeding volume and complication rate. Key words: Ureteroscopic lithotripsy; Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Renal calculi

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective To explore the clinical effects of ureteroscopic lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of renal calculi. Methods 85 cases of renal calculi treated at our hospital were randomly divided into a control group (n=42) and an observation group (n=43). The control group were treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and the observation group with ureteroscopic lithotomy. The stone clearance rate, intraoperative bleeding volume, operation time, complication rate, and quality of life were compared between the two groups. Results The stone clearance rate in the observation group was 90.70% (39/43), while that in the control group was 92.86% (39/42), with no statistical difference between the two groups (P>0.05) . The operation time was longer and the bleeding volume was lower in the observation group than in the control group, with statistical difference (P<0.05) . The complication rate was lower in the observation group than in the control group [2.33% (1/43) vs. 19.05% (8/42), P<0.05]. Conclusion Ureteroscopic lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy both are effective in treating renal calculi, but the former has lower bleeding volume and complication rate. Key words: Ureteroscopic lithotripsy; Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Renal calculi

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective To explore the clinical effects of ureteroscopic lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of renal calculi. Methods 85 cases of renal calculi treated at our hospital were randomly divided into a control group (n=42) and an observation group (n=43). The control group were treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and the observation group with ureteroscopic lithotomy. The stone clearance rate, intraoperative bleeding volume, operation time, complication rate, and quality of life were compared between the two groups. Results The stone clearance rate in the observation group was 90.70% (39/43), while that in the control group was 92.86% (39/42), with no statistical difference between the two groups (P>0.05) . The operation time was longer and the bleeding volume was lower in the observation group than in the control group, with statistical difference (P<0.05) . The complication rate was lower in the observation group than in the control group [2.33% (1/43) vs. 19.05% (8/42), P<0.05]. Conclusion Ureteroscopic lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy both are effective in treating renal calculi, but the former has lower bleeding volume and complication rate. Key words: Ureteroscopic lithotripsy; Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Renal calculi

Key concepts: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy, Medicine, Lithotomy position, Surgery, Lithotripsy, Complication, Kidney stones, Percutaneous

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Ureteroscopic lithotripsy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in treatment of renal calculi — Research Paper | ScholarLens