Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of computed tomography findings for success prediction after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for urinary tract stone disease

  • Urology - Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Purpose

Currently, the most widely used method of treatment of urinary tract stones is extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL). Patient and stone characteristics are important for SWL success. We evaluated noncontrast computed tomography (NCCT) characteristics of urinary tract stones for the prediction of SWL success.

Methods

Records of patients who underwent NCCT before SWL treatment between January 2008 and June 2012 were retrospectively evaluated. Demographic data were recruited from patient files. Hounsfield units (HU), stone size and skin-to-stone distance (SSD) were measured on NCCT. After serial measurements of the highest HU value (HUmax) and lowest HU value (HUmin), HU value was calculated as the average of these two values (HUave). These parameters were compared between successful [stone-free (SF) group] and unsuccessful [residual fragment (RF) group] cases after SWL.

Results

A total of 254 patients, 113 kidney stones and 141 ureteral stones, were evaluated. Mean age was 51.0 ± 14.6 (18–87) years, and mean stone size was 10.9 ± 3.7 mm. Stone diameter, HUmax, HUmin and HUave were significantly lower in SF group when compared with RF group for both kidney and ureteral stones (p < 0.05). We also found that SSD for kidney stones was predictive for SWL success.

Conclusions

We suggest that HUmax, HUmin and HUave values are significant predictors of SWL success for both kidney and ureteral stones. They might be used in daily clinical practice for patient counselling.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chaussy C, Brendel W, Schniedt E (1980) Extracorporeally induced destruction of kidney stones by shock waves. Lancet 2:1265–1268

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Weld KJ, Montiglio C, Morris MS, Bush AC, Cespedes RD (2007) Shock wave lithotripsy success for renal stones based on patient and stone computed tomography characteristics. Urology 70(6):1043–1046

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fielding JR, Steele G, Fox LA, Heller H, Loughlin KR (1997) Spiral computerized tomography in the evaluation of acute flank pain: a replacement for excretory urography. J Urol 157:2071–2073

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mostafavi MR, Ernst RD, Saltzman B (1998) Accurate determination of chemical composition of urinary calculi by spiral computerized tomography. J Urol 159:673–675

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Joseph P, Mandal AK, Singh SK, Mandal P, Sankhwar SN, Sharma SK (2002) Computerized tomography attenuation value of renal calculus: can it predict successful fragmentation of the calculus by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy? A preliminary study. J Urol 167:1968–1971

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gupta NP, Ansari MS, Kesarvani P, Kapoor A, Mukhopadhyay S (2005) Role of computed tomography with no contrast medium enhancement in predicting the outcome of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for urinary calculi. BJU Int 95:1285–1288

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wang LJ, Wong YC, Chuang CK, Chu SH, Chen CS, See LC, Chiang YJ (2005) Predictions of outcomes of renal stones after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy from stone characteristics determined by unenhanced helical computed tomography: a multivariate analysis. Eur Radiol 15:2238–2243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Yoshida S, Hayashi T, Ikeda J, Yoshinaga A, Ohno R, Ishii N, Okada T, Osada H, Honda N, Yamada T (2006) Role of volume and attenuation value histogram of urinary stone on noncontrast helical computed tomography as predictor of fragility by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Urology 68:33–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Nakada SY, Hoff DG, Attai S, Heisey D, Blankenbaker D, Pozniak M (2000) Determination of stone composition by non-contrast spiral computed tomography in the clinical setting. Urology 55:816–819

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pareek G, Hedican SP, Lee FT Jr, Nakada SY (2005) Shock wave lithotripsy success determined by skin-to-stone distance on computed tomography. Urology 66:941–944

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Denstedt JD, Clayman RV, Preminger GM (1990) Efficiency quotient as a means of comparing lithotriptors. J Endourol 4(suppl):100

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dretler SP, Polykoff G (1996) Calcium oxalate stone morphology: fine tuning our therapeutic distinctions. J Urol 155:828–833

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wang YH, Grenabo L, Hedelin H, Pettersson S, Wikholm G, Zachrisson BF (1993) Analysis of stone fragility in vitro and in vivo with piezoelectric shock waves using the EDAP LT-01. J Urol 149:699–702

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bon D, Dore B, Irani J, Marroncle M, Aubert J (1996) Radiographic prognostic criteria for extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy: a study of 485 patients. Urology 48:556–561

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Chaussy C, Fuchs G (1986) Extracorporeal lithotripsy in the treatment of renal lithiasis. 5 years’ experience. J Urol (Paris) 92(6):339–343

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Mattelaer P, Schroder T, Fischer N, Jakse G (1994) In situ extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of distal ureteral stones: parameters for therapeutic success. Urol Int 53:87

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Dretler SP (1988) Stone fragility—a new therapeutic distinction. J Urol 139:1124–1127

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ouzaid I, Al-qahtani S, Dominique S, Hupertan V, Fernandez P, Hermieu JF, Delmas V, Ravery V (2012) A 970 hounsfield units (HU) threshold of kidney stone density on non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) improves patients’ selection for extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL): evidence from a prospective study. BJU Int 110:438–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Dokuz Eylul University, Inciralti, Izmir, 35340, Turkey

    Serdar Celik, Ozan Bozkurt, Sedat Egriboyun, Omer Demir & Ilhan Celebi

  2. Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey

    Fatih Gulbey Kaya & Mustafa Secil

Authors
  1. Serdar Celik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ozan Bozkurt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fatih Gulbey Kaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sedat Egriboyun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Omer Demir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mustafa Secil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ilhan Celebi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Serdar Celik.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Celik, S., Bozkurt, O., Kaya, F.G. et al. Evaluation of computed tomography findings for success prediction after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for urinary tract stone disease. Int Urol Nephrol 47, 69–73 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-014-0857-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-014-0857-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation