术前结石处输尿管壁最大厚度对输尿管嵌顿性结石发生及预后的预测

doi:10.19558/j.cnki.10-1020/r.2020.06.006

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (602 KB) RICH HTML
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要 目的： 探讨结石处输尿管壁最大厚度在输尿管嵌顿性结石发生及预后预测价值。方法： 回顾性分析2018年1月–2019年12月收治192例输尿管结石患者的临床资料,其中诊断为嵌顿性结石80例设为A组,诊断为非嵌顿性结石112例设为B组;比较两组术前基线临床资料特征,采用Logistic回归模型分析输尿管嵌顿性结石术前独立预测因素,同时描绘ROC曲线评价术前结石处输尿管壁最大厚度预测价值。结果： ①两组合并高血压情况、既往同侧结石治疗史、合并肾积水情况、结石横径、结石最大横截面积、结石体积、结石CT值、输尿管壁最大厚度及肾区叩击痛程度比较差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）;②Logistic回归模型多因素分析结果提示,术前结石处输尿管壁最大厚度是输尿管嵌顿性结石术前独立预测因素（P<0.05）;③描绘ROC曲线,术前结石处输尿管壁最大厚度AUC为0.93（95%CI：0.86~0.96）,最佳预测截断值为3.20 mm,敏感度和特异度分别为83.17%,87.93%;④预测为输尿管嵌顿性结石组患者输尿管水肿、息肉及狭窄发生率均显著高于非输尿管嵌顿性结石组（P<0.05）;预测为输尿管嵌顿性结石组患者术后结石清除率显著低于非输尿管嵌顿性结石组（P<0.05）。结论： 术前结石处输尿管壁最大厚度可用于预测输尿管嵌顿性结石发生,其中结石处输尿管壁最大厚度≥3.20 mm者合并病变更为严重,结石清除率较低。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	李志勇
	蒲光平
	严坤

关键词 ：输尿管壁, 厚度, 嵌顿性结石, 预后, 预测

Abstract：Objective： To investigate the clinical value of preoperative maximum thickness of ureteral wall in the prediction on occurrence and prognosis of ureteral incarcerated calculi. Methods： The clinical data of 192 patients with ureteral incarcerated calculi including 80 cases of ureteral incarcerated calculi （group A） and 112 cases without ureteral incarcerated calculi （group B） were retrospectively chosen in the period from January 2018 to December 2019. The baseline clinical data of two groups before operation were compared and the independent predictors of ureteral incarcerated calculi before operation were analyzed by logistic regression. Then ROC curve was drawn to evaluate the predictive value of the maximum thickness of ureteral wall in stone place before operation. Results： （1） There were significant differences in hypertension, previous history of ipsilateral stones, hydronephrosis, stone diameter, stone maximum cross-sectional area, stone volume, stone CT value, maximum thickness of ureter wall and percussion pain degree in renal area between two groups （P < 0.05）. （2） The results of logistic regression analysis showed that the maximum thickness of ureteral wall was the independent predictor of ureteral incarcerated calculi before operation （P < 0.05）. （3） The AUC by ROC curve of maximum thickness of ureteral wall was 0.93 （95% CI： 0.86 - 0.96）, the best predicted cutoff value was 3.20 mm, the sensitivity and specificity were 83.17% and 87.93%, respectively. （4） The incidence of ureteral edema, polyp and stricture in predicted ureteral incarcerated calculi group was significantly higher than non-predicted ureteral incarcerated calculi group （P < 0.05）. The stone clearance rate in predicted ureteral incarcerated calculi group was significantly lower than in non-predicted ureteral incarcerated calculi group （P < 0.05）. Conclusion： The maximum thickness of the ureteral wall in stone place before operation can be used to predict the occurrence of ureteral incarcerated stone, in which the patients with maximum thickness of the ureteral wall ≥ 3.20 mm possess more seriousness disease and the lower stone clearance rate.

Key words： ureteral wall thickness incarcerated calculi prognosis prediction

收稿日期: 2020-02-28

ZTFLH:

R693

通讯作者: 李志勇,dicklea1980@126.com

引用本文:

李志勇, 蒲光平, 严坤. 术前结石处输尿管壁最大厚度对输尿管嵌顿性结石发生及预后的预测[J]. 微创泌尿外科杂志, 2020, 9(6): 386-390.
LI Zhiyong, PU Guangping, YAN Kun. Predictive value of preoperative maximum thickness of ureteral wall for occurrence and prognosis of ureteral incarcerated calculi. JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE UROLOGY, 2020, 9(6): 386-390.

链接本文:

http://journal20.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_zgmnwk/CN/abstract/abstract1634.shtml 或 http://journal20.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_zgmnwk/CN/Y2020/V9/I6/386

[1] 王贻兵,王侠.复杂性输尿管上段结石治疗进展综述.实用临床医药杂志,2019,23(7):130-132.
[2] 王成路,金露,薛波新.术前预测输尿管嵌顿性结石的临床因素分析.中华泌尿外科杂志,2019,40(1):42-46.
[3] HUANG J, XIE D, XIONG R, et al.The application of suctioning flexible ureteroscopy with intelligent pressure control in treating upper urinary tract calculi on patients with a solitary kidney. Urology, 2018,111(8):44-47.
[4] YAMASHITA S, KOHJIMOTO Y, IGUCHI T, et al.Ureteral wall volume at ureteral stone site is a critical predictor for shock wave lithotripsy outcomes: comparison with ureteral wall thickness and area. Urolithiasis, 2020,48(4):361-368.
[5] 那彦群,叶章群,孙颖浩,等.中国泌尿外科疾病诊断治疗指南.北京:人民卫生出版社,2014:137.
[6] 朱澄村,饶婷,程帆,等.输尿管软镜碎石术治疗孤立肾肾结石的有效性和安全性分析.中华泌尿外科杂志,2019,40(4):281-284.
[7] 张华明,张家伟,孙东翀,等.末端可弯硬性输尿管肾镜治疗输尿管嵌顿性结石的临床应用.中华泌尿外科杂志,2018,39(8):592-595.
[8] WANG Y, ZHONG B, YANG X, et al.Comparison of the efficacy and safety of URSL, RPLU, and MPCNL for treatment of large upper impacted ureteral stones: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Micro Inf, 2017,23(7):464-469.
[9] CHANDHOKE R, BAMBERGER JN, GALLANTE B, et al.Peri-Calculus ureteral thickness on computed tomography predicts stone impaction at time of surgery: a prospective study. J Endourol, 2020,34(1):107-111.
[10] ÖZBIR S, CAN O, ATALAY H, et al.Formula for predicting the impaction of ureteral stones. Urolithiasis, 2020,48(4):353-360.
[11] TUERXUN A, BATUER A, ERTURHAN S, et al.Impaction and prediction: does ureteral wall thickness affect the success of medical expulsive therapy in pediatric ureteral stones? Urol Int, 2017,98(4):436-441.
[12] YOSHIDA T, INOUE T, TAGUCHI M, et al.Ureteral wall thickness as a significant factor in predicting spontaneous passage of ureteral stones of ≤ 10 mm: a preliminary report. World J Urol, 2019,37(5):913-919.
[13] SHI YF, JU WL, ZHU YP, et al.The impact of ureteral stent indwelling time on the treatment of acute infection caused by ureteral calculi. Urolithiasis, 2017,45(6):579-583.
[14] HAMADA K, ISHITSUKA R, KAWAI K, et al.[A case of upper urinary tract MALT lymphoma with remarkable thickness of renal pelvis and ureter wall]. Hinyokika Kiyo, 2018,64(12):489-495.
[15] SARICA K, ERYILDIRIM B, AKDERE H, et al.Could ureteral wall thickness have an impact on the operative and post-operative parameters in ureteroscopic management of proximal ureteral stones? Actas Urol Esp, 2019,43(9):474-479.
[16] YOSHIDA T, INOUE T, OMURA N, et al.Ureteral wall thickness as a preoperative indicator of impacted stones in patients with ureteral stones undergoing ureteroscopic lithotripsy. Urology, 2017,106(8):45-49.