Skip to main content
Log in

Computed tomography-based novel prediction model for the stone-free rate of ureteroscopic lithotripsy

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Urolithiasis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether computed tomography (CT) parameters can predict the success of ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL) and establish a model for predicting the success rates of a single URSL procedure for the treatment of a single ureteral stone. We retrospectively reviewed the records of 237 patients who underwent URSL for ureteral stones diagnosed by CT between January 2009 and June 2012. Stone-free status was defined as the absence of stones or residual stone fragments <2 mm by ureteroscopy and plain abdominal radiography. We analyzed the correlations between the outcome of URSL and the patients’ sex, age, height, body weight, body mass index, and history of ureteral stone. Stone factors such as the diameter (D), stone height (H), volumetric stone burden (VSB; D 2 × H × 5 mm × π × 1/6), estimated stone location (ESL; number of axial cut images between the stone and uretero-vesical junction), tissue rim sign (RS; 0–3), perinephric edema (0–3), hydronephrosis (0–3), and Hounsfield unit (HU) were also analyzed. We then developed a model to predict the probability of successful URSL by applying a logistic model to our data. The success rate of URSL was 85.7 % (203/237). Univariate analysis found that stone diameter, length, VSB, ESL, HU and RS significantly affected the stone-free rate. Multivariate analysis indicated that stone diameter, ESL and RS independently influenced the stone-free rate. The logistic model indicated that success rates = 1/[1 + exp{−6.146 + 0.071(D) + 0.153(ESL) + 1.534(RS)}] with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.825. Stone diameter, ESL, and RS were independent predictors of the outcome of a single URSL for a single ureteral stone.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CT:

Computed tomography

URSL:

Ureteroscopic lithotripsy

UHCT:

Unenhanced helical computed tomography

ESWL:

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy

RS:

Tissue rim sign

BMI:

Body mass index

VSB:

Volumetric stone burden

ESL:

Estimated stone location

UVJ:

Uretero-vesical junction

UPJ:

Uretero-pelvic junction

References

  1. Miller OF, Rineer SK, Reichard SR, Buckley RG, Donovan MS, Graham IR, Goff WB, Kane CJ (1998) Prospective comparison of unenhanced spiral computed tomography and intravenous urogram in the evaluation of acute flank pain. Urol Gold J 52(6):982–987

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Pfister SA, Deckart A, Laschke S, Dellas S, Otto U, Buitrago C, Roth J, Wiesner W, Bongartz G, Gasser TC (2003) Unenhanced helical computed tomography vs intravenous urography in patients with acute flank pain: accuracy and economic impact in a randomized prospective trial. Eur Radiol 13(11):2513–2520

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Smith RC, Verga M, Dalrymple N, McCarthy S, Rosenfield AT (1996) Acute ureteral obstruction: value of secondary signs of helical unenhanced CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 167(5):1109–1113

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ege G, Akman H, Kuzucu K, Yildiz S (2003) Acute ureterolithiasis: incidence of secondary signs on unenhanced helical CT and influence on patient management. Clin Radiol 58(12):990–994

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bewick V, Cheek L, Ball J (2005) Statistics review 14: logistic regression. Crit Care 9(1):112–118

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Goodman TM (1977) Ureteroscopy with pediatric cystoscope in adults. Urol Gold J 9(4):394

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lyon ES, Kyker JS, Schoenberg HW (1978) Transurethral ureteroscopy in women: a ready addition to the urological armamentarium. J Urol 119(1):35–36

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Grasso M (2000) Ureteropyeloscopic treatment of ureteral and intrarenal calculi. Urol Clin North Am 27(4):623–631

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wolf JS Jr (2007) Treatment selection and outcomes: ureteral calculi. Urol Clin N Am 34(3):421–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Abdelrahim AF, Abdelmaguid A, Abuzeid H, Amin M, el Mousa S, Abdelrahim F (2008) Rigid ureteroscopy for ureteral stones: factors associated with intraoperative adverse events. J Endourol 22(2):277–280. doi:10.1089/end.2007.0072

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Assimos DG, Boyce WH, Furr EG, Espeland MA, Holmes RP, Harrison LH, Kroovand RL, McCullough DL (1989) Selective elevation of urinary enzyme levels after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 142(3):687–690

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Boulay I, Holtz P, Foley WD, White B, Begun FP (1999) Ureteral calculi: diagnostic efficacy of helical CT and implications for treatment of patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 172(6):1485–1490

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Takahashi N, Kawashima A, Ernst RD, Boridy IC, Goldman SM, Benson GS, Sandler CM (1998) Ureterolithiasis: can clinical outcome be predicted with unenhanced helical CT? Radiology 208(1):97–102

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Seitz C, Memarsadeghi M, Fajkovic H, Tanovic E (2008) Secondary signs of non-enhanced CT prior to laser ureterolithotripsy: is treatment outcome predictable? J Endourol 22(3):415–418

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Magnuson WJ, Tomera KM, Lance RS (2005) Hounsfield unit density accurately predicts ESWL success. Alask Med 47(2):6–9

    Google Scholar 

  16. Imamura Y, Kawamura K, Sazuka T, Sakamoto S, Imamoto T, Nihei N, Suzuki H, Okano T, Nozumi K, Ichikawa T (2013) Development of a nomogram for predicting the stone-free rate after transurethral ureterolithotripsy using semi-rigid ureteroscope. Int J Urol 20(6):616–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Resorlu B, Unsal A, Gulec H, Oztuna D (2012) A new scoring system for predicting stone-free rate after retrograde intrarenal surgery: the “Resorlu–Unsal stone score”. Urology 80(3):512–518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cheol Yong Yoon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kim, J.W., Chae, J.Y., Kim, J.W. et al. Computed tomography-based novel prediction model for the stone-free rate of ureteroscopic lithotripsy. Urolithiasis 42, 75–79 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-013-0609-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-013-0609-0

Keywords

Navigation