论文部分内容阅读
为探讨不同部位上尿路阴性结石定位方法的选择，对98例上尿路阴性结石患者采用大剂量静脉尿路造影（IVU）和逆行插管（RGP）定位法行体外冲击波碎石术（ESWL），并根据其疗效进行比较。结果：20例肾阴性结石中，8例行IVU定位下ESWL碎石，治愈率为12．5％；12例行RGP定位下ESWL碎石，治愈率为8.3％；认为对此类患者不宜行X线定位碎石。58例输尿管上、中段明性结石中，28例行IVU定位碎石，治愈率为71．4％，结合RGP定位，治愈率达89．3％；单纯行RGP定位下ESWL碎石30例，治愈率为93．3％；认为对此类患者可先采用IVU定位碎石，如碎石失败则改用RGP定位。20例输尿管下段阴性结石中，行IVP定位碎石8例，治愈率为12．5％；行RGP定位碎石12例，治愈率为58．3％；认为对此类患者应首先考虑行RGP定位下碎石。
In order to explore the choice of the location of upper urinary tract-negative stones in different sites, 98 cases of upper urinary tract-negative stones were treated with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) by IVU and retrograde catheterization (RGP) ), And according to their efficacy to compare. Results: In 20 cases of renal-negative stones, 8 cases of ESWL grafts were treated with IVU, the cure rate was 12.5%; 12 cases were treated with RGP-positioned ESWL grafts, the cure rate was 8.3%; X-ray positioning gravel. 58 cases of upper and middle ureteral clear stones, 28 cases of IVU positioning gravel, the cure rate was 71.4%, combined with RGP positioning, the cure rate was 89.3%; simple RGP positioning of ESWL gravel 30 cases, The cure rate was 93.3%. It is considered that the IVU positioning gravel should be used for such patients first, and the RGP positioning should be used if the gravel fails. 20 cases of negative ureteral stones, IVP positioning gravel in 8 cases, the cure rate was 12.5%; RGP positioning gravel in 12 cases, the cure rate was 58.3%; that such patients should first consider the RGP Locate the gravel.