Clinical study of the postural drainage lithotripsy system for the treatment of residual fragments after retrograde intrarenal surgery.

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Dai Liangliang, Wei Hanping, Qiu Chenjie, Wu Tingchun, Jiao Zhimin, Yuan Xiaoliang, Yang Tao, Shi Honglei
{"title":"Clinical study of the postural drainage lithotripsy system for the treatment of residual fragments after retrograde intrarenal surgery.","authors":"Dai Liangliang, Wei Hanping, Qiu Chenjie, Wu Tingchun, Jiao Zhimin, Yuan Xiaoliang, Yang Tao, Shi Honglei","doi":"10.1007/s00345-025-05956-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two surgical modalities, Retrograde Intrarenal Ureteral Lithotripsy (RIRS) and PDLS + RIRS (Retrograde Intrarenal Ureteral Lithotripsy Combined with Posterior Drainage Lithotripsy System), in terms of stone removal, and to provide a basis for decision-making in clinical treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective study was carried out from 2022-02-16 to 2025-02-16 and included patients attending our hospital to collect clinical data, with surgery performed by the same attending surgeon. Patients with RFs determined by X-ray or CT 1-3 days after RIRS were selected and randomly divided into a treatment group (PDLS intervention) and a control group (conventional instruction). Patients in the treatment group were treated with preoperative water to hold urine and PDLS for 10 min, adverse effects and stone expulsion were recorded, and stone clearance status was determined by mean imaging follow-up for 20 days. The sample size was calculated using PASS 11 software, and 136 samples were identified for participation in the experiment, and the data were analysed using R 4.3.0 statistical analysis software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of baseline characteristics such as Age, BMI, CT value, Gender, Hypertension, Diabetes, Respiratory disease, History of RIRS surgery, Haematuria, Back pain and Fever (P > 0.05). However, in terms of stone-free rate, the PDLS + RIRS group had a significantly higher stone-free rate (91.67%) than the RIRS group (75.00%), and the difference was statistically significant (χ²=6.94, P = 0.008).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Studies have shown that the PDLS + RIRS surgical approach has higher efficiency and advantages in stone removal, which can be used as a reference for clinical treatment.</p><p><strong>Clinical trial registry number: </strong>ChiCTR2300071185; Registration date: 2023-05-06.</p>","PeriodicalId":23954,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Urology","volume":"43 1","pages":"576"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-025-05956-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two surgical modalities, Retrograde Intrarenal Ureteral Lithotripsy (RIRS) and PDLS + RIRS (Retrograde Intrarenal Ureteral Lithotripsy Combined with Posterior Drainage Lithotripsy System), in terms of stone removal, and to provide a basis for decision-making in clinical treatment.

Methods: This prospective study was carried out from 2022-02-16 to 2025-02-16 and included patients attending our hospital to collect clinical data, with surgery performed by the same attending surgeon. Patients with RFs determined by X-ray or CT 1-3 days after RIRS were selected and randomly divided into a treatment group (PDLS intervention) and a control group (conventional instruction). Patients in the treatment group were treated with preoperative water to hold urine and PDLS for 10 min, adverse effects and stone expulsion were recorded, and stone clearance status was determined by mean imaging follow-up for 20 days. The sample size was calculated using PASS 11 software, and 136 samples were identified for participation in the experiment, and the data were analysed using R 4.3.0 statistical analysis software.

Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of baseline characteristics such as Age, BMI, CT value, Gender, Hypertension, Diabetes, Respiratory disease, History of RIRS surgery, Haematuria, Back pain and Fever (P > 0.05). However, in terms of stone-free rate, the PDLS + RIRS group had a significantly higher stone-free rate (91.67%) than the RIRS group (75.00%), and the difference was statistically significant (χ²=6.94, P = 0.008).

Conclusion: Studies have shown that the PDLS + RIRS surgical approach has higher efficiency and advantages in stone removal, which can be used as a reference for clinical treatment.

Clinical trial registry number: ChiCTR2300071185; Registration date: 2023-05-06.

体位引流碎石系统治疗逆行肾内手术后残留碎片的临床研究。
目的:比较逆行肾内输尿管碎石术(RIRS)和PDLS + RIRS(逆行肾内输尿管碎石术联合后路引流碎石系统)两种手术方式在结石取出方面的疗效,为临床治疗决策提供依据。方法:本前瞻性研究于2022年2月16日至2025年2月16日在我院就诊的患者,由同一主治医生进行手术,收集临床资料。选择RIRS后1-3天x线或CT确诊的RFs患者,随机分为治疗组(PDLS干预)和对照组(常规指导)。治疗组患者术前行保尿水和PDLS治疗10 min,记录不良反应及结石排出情况,平均影像学随访20 d,确定结石清除情况。使用PASS 11软件计算样本量,确定136个样本参与实验,使用R 4.3.0统计分析软件对数据进行分析。结果:两组患者年龄、BMI、CT值、性别、高血压、糖尿病、呼吸系统疾病、RIRS手术史、血尿、背痛、发热等基线特征比较,差异均无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。但在结石去除率方面,PDLS + RIRS组结石去除率(91.67%)明显高于RIRS组(75.00%),差异有统计学意义(χ²=6.94,P = 0.008)。结论:研究表明,PDLS + RIRS手术入路在结石取出方面具有更高的效率和优势,可作为临床治疗的参考。临床试验注册号:ChiCTR2300071185;注册日期:2023-05-06。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
World Journal of Urology
World Journal of Urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
8.80%
发文量
317
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY conveys regularly the essential results of urological research and their practical and clinical relevance to a broad audience of urologists in research and clinical practice. In order to guarantee a balanced program, articles are published to reflect the developments in all fields of urology on an internationally advanced level. Each issue treats a main topic in review articles of invited international experts. Free papers are unrelated articles to the main topic.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信