Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Longitudinal follow-up of incidental renal calculi on computed tomography

  • Kidneys, Ureters, Bladder, Retroperitoneum
  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Rationale and objectives

Measuring small kidney stones on CT is a time-consuming task often neglected. Volumetric assessment provides a better measure of size than linear dimensions. Our objective is to analyze the growth rate and prognosis of incidental kidney stones in asymptomatic patients on CT.

Materials and methods

This retrospective study included 4266 scans from 2030 asymptomatic patients who underwent two or more nonenhanced CT scans for colorectal screening between 2004 and 2016. The DL software identified and measured the volume, location, and attenuation of 883 stones. The corresponding scans were manually evaluated, and patients without follow-up were excluded. At each follow-up, the stones were categorized as new, growing, persistent, or resolved. Stone size (volume and diameter), attenuation, and location were correlated with the outcome and growth rates of the stones.

Results

The stone cohort comprised 407 scans from 189 (M: 124, F: 65, median age: 55.4 years) patients. The median number of stones per scan was 1 (IQR: [1, 2]). The median stone volume was 17.1 mm3 (IQR: [7.4, 43.6]) and the median peak attenuation was 308 HU (IQR: [204, 532]. The 189 initial scans contained 291stones; 91 (31.3%) resolved, 142 (48.8%) grew, and 58 (19.9) remained persistent at the first follow-up. At the second follow-up (for 27 patients with 2 follow-ups), 14/44 (31.8%) stones had resolved, 19/44 (43.2%) grew and 11/44 (25%) were persistent. The median growth rate of growing stones was 3.3 mm3/year, IQR: [1.4,7.4]. Size and attenuation had a moderate correlation (Spearman rho 0.53, P < .001 for volume, and 0.50 P < .001 for peak attenuation) with the growth rate. Growing and persistent stones had significantly greater maximum axial diameter (2.7 vs 2.3 mm, P =.047) and peak attenuation (300 vs 258 HU, P =.031)

Conclusion

We report a 12.7% prevalence of incidental kidney stones in asymptomatic adults, of which about half grew during follow-up with a median growth rate of about 3.3 mm3/year.

Graphical Abstract

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CTC:

Computed tomography colonography

DL:

Deep learning

IQR:

Interquartile range

NA:

Not available

References

  1. Scales CD, Smith AC, Hanley JM, Saigal CS. Prevalence of Kidney Stones in the United States. European Urology 2012;62(1):160-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.052

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Hill AJ, Basourakos SP, Lewicki P, Wu X, Arenas-Gallo C, Chuang D, Bodner D, Jaeger I, Nevo A, Zell M, Markt SC, Eisner BH, Shoag JE. Incidence of Kidney Stones in the United States: The Continuous National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Journal of Urology 2022;207(4):851-856. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kittanamongkolchai W, Vaughan LE, Enders FT, Dhondup T, Mehta RA, Krambeck AE, Mccollough CH, Vrtiska TJ, Lieske JC, Rule AD. The Changing Incidence and Presentation of Urinary Stones Over 3 Decades. Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2018;93(3):291-299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2017.11.018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Pearle MS, Calhoun EA, Curhan GC, Urologic Diseases of America P. Urologic diseases in America project: urolithiasis. J Urol 2005;173(3):848-857.https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000152082.14384.d7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Antonelli JA, Maalouf NM, Pearle MS, Lotan Y. Use of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey to Calculate the Impact of Obesity and Diabetes on Cost and Prevalence of Urolithiasis in 2030. European Urology 2014;66(4):724-729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.06.036

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Vrtiska TJ. Quantitation of stone burden: imaging advances. Urol Res 2005;33(5):398-402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-005-0490-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pooler BD, Lubner MG, Kim DH, Ryckman EM, Sivalingam S, Tang J, Nakada SY, Chen GH, Pickhardt PJ. Prospective Trial of the Detection of Urolithiasis on Ultralow Dose (Sub mSv) Noncontrast Computerized Tomography: Direct Comparison against Routine Low Dose Reference Standard. Journal of Urology 2014;192(5):1433-1439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.05.089

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Boyce CJ, Pickhardt PJ, Lawrence EM, Kim DH, Bruce RJ. Prevalence of Urolithiasis in Asymptomatic Adults: Objective Determination Using Low Dose Noncontrast Computerized Tomography. Journal of Urology 2010;183(3):1017-1021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.11.047

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kang HW, Lee SK, Kim WT, Kim YJ, Yun SJ, Lee SC, Kim WJ. Natural history of asymptomatic renal stones and prediction of stone related events. J Urol 2013;189(5):1740-1746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.11.113

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gluecker TM, Johnson CD, Wilson LA, MacCarty RL, Welch TJ, Vanness DJ, Ahlquist DA. Extracolonic findings at CT colonography: Evaluation of prevalence and cost in a screening population. Gastroenterology 2003;124(4):911-916. https://doi.org/10.1053/gast.2003.50158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kampa RJ, Ghani KR, Wahed S, Patel U, Anson KM. Size matters: a survey of how urinary-tract stones are measured in the UK. J Endourol 2005;19(7):856-860. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2005.19.856

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lidén M, Andersson T, Geijer H. Making renal stones change size-impact of CT image post processing and reader variability. Eur Radiol 2011;21(10):2218-2225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2171-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Danilovic A, Rocha BA, Marchini GS, Traxer O, Batagello C, Vicentini FC, Torricelli FCM, Srougi M, Nahas WC, Mazzucchi E. Computed tomography window affects kidney stones measurements. Int Braz J Urol 2019;45(5):948-955. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2018.0819

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Bell JR, Posielski NM, Penniston KL, Lubner MG, Nakada SY, Pickhardt PJ. Automated Computer Software Compared with Manual Measurements for CT-Based Urinary Stone Metrics: An Evaluation Study. Journal of Endourology 2018;32(5):455-461. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2017.0787

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Patel SR, Stanton P, Zelinski N, Borman EJ, Pozniak MA, Nakada SY, Pickhardt PJ. Automated Renal Stone Volume Measurement by Noncontrast Computerized Tomography is More Reproducible Than Manual Linear Size Measurement. Journal of Urology 2011;186(6):2275-2279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.07.091

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Patel SR, Wells S, Ruma J, King S, Lubner MG, Nakada SY, Pickhardt PJ. Automated Volumetric Assessment by Noncontrast Computed Tomography in the Surveillance of Nephrolithiasis. Urology 2012;80(1):27-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2012.03.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Planz VB, Posielski NM, Lubner MG, Li K, Chen GH, Nakada SY, Pickhardt PJ. Ultra-low-dose limited renal CT for volumetric stone surveillance: advantages over standard unenhanced CT. Abdominal Radiology 2019;44(1):227-233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-018-1719-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Elton DC, Turkbey EB, Pickhardt PJ, Summers RM. A deep learning system for automated kidney stone detection and volumetric segmentation on noncontrast CT scans. Medical Physics 2022. https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.15518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, Butler JA, Puckett ML, Hildebrandt HA, Wong RK, Nugent PA, Mysliwiec PA, Schindler WR. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med 2003;349(23):2191-2200. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa031618

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Pickhardt PJ, Graffy PM, Zea R, Lee SJ, Liu J, Sandfort V, Summers RM. Automated CT biomarkers for opportunistic prediction of future cardiovascular events and mortality in an asymptomatic screening population: a retrospective cohort study. The Lancet Digital Health 2020;2(4):e192-e200. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(20)30025-X

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Tallam H, Elton DC, Lee S, Wakim P, Pickhardt PJ, Summers RM. Fully Automated Abdominal CT Biomarkers for Type 2 Diabetes Using Deep Learning. Radiology 2022;304(1):85-95. doi: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.211914

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mukherjee P, Lee S, Pickhardt PJ, Summers RM. Automated Assessment of Renal Calculi in Serial Computed Tomography Scans. Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2022; p. 39-48.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Dehmeshki J, Ye X, Amin H, Abaei M, Lin X, Qanadli SD. Volumetric quantification of atherosclerotic plaque in CT considering partial volume effect. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2007;26(3):273-282. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/tmi.2007.893344

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Holm S. A Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test Procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 1979;6(2):65-70.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kim IK, Tan JC, Lapasia J, Elihu A, Busque S, Melcher ML. Incidental kidney stones: a single center experience with kidney donor selection. Clin Transplant 2012;26(4):558-563. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-0012.2011.01567.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hara AK, Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, Welch TJ. Incidental extracolonic findings at CT colonography. Radiology 2000;215(2):353-357. doi: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.215.2.r00ap33353

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Rajapaksa RC, Macari M, Bini EJ. Prevalence and Impact of Extracolonic Findings in Patients Undergoing CT Colonography. Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology 2004;38(9).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Koh LT, Ng FC, Ng KK. Outcomes of long-term follow-up of patients with conservative management of asymptomatic renal calculi. BJU Int 2012;109(4):622-625. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10329.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Romero V, Akpinar H, Assimos DG. Kidney stones: a global picture of prevalence, incidence, and associated risk factors. Reviews in urology 2010;12(2-3):e86-e96.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Nakada SY, Hoff DG, Attai S, Heisey D, Blankenbaker D, Pozniak M. Determination of stone composition by noncontrast spiral computed tomography in the clinical setting. Urology 2000;55(6):816-819. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-4295(00)00518-5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Demehri S, Kalra MK, Rybicki FJ, Steigner ML, Lang MJ, Houseman EA, Curhan GC, Silverman SG. Quantification of urinary stone volume: attenuation threshold–based CT method—a technical note. Radiology 2011;258(3):915-922.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Glowacki L, Beecroft M, Cook R, Pahl D, Churchill D. The natural history of asymptomatic urolithiasis. The Journal of urology 1992;147(2):319-321.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Selby MG, Vrtiska TJ, Krambeck AE, McCollough CH, Elsherbiny HE, Bergstralh EJ, Lieske JC, Rule AD. Quantification of asymptomatic kidney stone burden by computed tomography for predicting future symptomatic stone events. Urology 2015;85(1):45-50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Saw KC, McAteer JA, Monga AG, Chua GT, Lingeman JE, Williams Jr JC. Helical CT of urinary calculi: effect of stone composition, stone size, and scan collimation. American Journal of Roentgenology 2000;175(2):329-332.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health, Clinical Center, and we utilized the computational resources of the National Institutes of Health high-performance computing Biowulf cluster.

Funding

This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health, Clinical Center (Z01 CL040003 and Z01 CL040004).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Perry J. Pickhardt and Ronald M. Summers are co-senior authors.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Imaging Biomarkers and Computer-Aided Diagnosis Laboratory, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, Building 10, Room 1C224D, 10 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD, 20892-1182, USA

    Pritam Mukherjee, Sungwon Lee, Daniel C. Elton & Ronald M. Summers

  2. Department of Radiology, School of Medicine & Public Health, The University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA

    Perry J. Pickhardt

Authors
  1. Pritam Mukherjee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sungwon Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel C. Elton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Perry J. Pickhardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ronald M. Summers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ronald M. Summers.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

Author RMS receives royalties from iCAD, Philips, ScanMed, PingAn, MGB and Translation Holdings and has received research support from Ping An (CRADA). PJP is an adviser or consultant for Zebra Medical Vision and Bracco Diagnostics, and shareholder in Cellectar, Elucent, and SHINE.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board. The need for additional signed informed consent was waived.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 820 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mukherjee, P., Lee, S., Elton, D.C. et al. Longitudinal follow-up of incidental renal calculi on computed tomography. Abdom Radiol 49, 173–181 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-023-04075-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-023-04075-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation