Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Follow-up of urolithiasis patients after treatment: an algorithm from the EAU Urolithiasis Panel

  • Invited Review
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To develop a follow-up algorithm for urinary stone patients after definitive treatment.

Materials and methods

The panel performed a systematic review on follow-up of urinary stone patients after treatment (PROSPERO: CRD42020205739). Given the lack of comparative studies we critically evaluated the literature and reached a consensus on the follow-up scheme.

Results

A total of 76 studies were included in the analysis, including 17 RCTs. In the stone-free general population group, 71–100% of patients are stone-free at 12 months while 29–94% remain stone-free at 36 months. We propose counselling these patients on imaging versus discharge after the first year. The stone-free rate in high-risk patients not receiving targeted medical therapy is < 40% at 36 months, a fact that supports imaging, metabolic, and treatment monitoring follow-up once a year. Patients with residual fragments ≤ 4 mm have a spontaneous expulsion rate of 18–47% and a growth rate of 10–41% at 12 months, supporting annual imaging follow-up. Patients with residual fragments > 4 mm should be considered for surgical re-intervention based on the low spontaneous expulsion rate (13% at 1 year) and high risk of recurrence. Plain film KUB and/or kidney ultrasonography based on clinicians’ preference and stone characteristics is the preferred imaging follow-up. Computed tomography should be considered if patient is symptomatic or intervention is planned.

Conclusions

Based on evidence from the systematic review we propose, for the first time, a follow-up algorithm for patients after surgical stone treatment balancing the risks of stone recurrence against the burden of radiation from imaging studies.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data can be provided from authors upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Hesse A, Brändle E, Wilbert D, Köhrmann KU, Alken P (2003) Study on the prevalence and incidence of urolithiasis in Germany comparing the years 1979 vs. 2000. Eur Urol 44(6):709–713

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Stamatelou KK, Francis ME, Jones CA, Nyberg LM, Curhan GC (2003) Time trends in reported prevalence of kidney stones in the United States: 1976–1994. Kidney Int 63(5):1817–1823

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Okuyama M (2011) Epidemiology of urolithiasis. Clin Calcium 21(10):1442–1447

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Strohmaier WL (2000) Course of calcium stone disease without treatment. What can we expect? Eur Urol 37(3):339–344

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ferraro PM, Curhan GC, D’Addessi A, Gambaro G (2017) Risk of recurrence of idiopathic calcium kidney stones: analysis of data from the literature. J Nephrol 30(2):227–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Türk CNA, Petřík A, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Somani B et al (2021) EAU guidelines on urolithiasis. EAU Guidelines Office, Arnhem, The Netherlands. Accessed on October 2021

  7. Tzelves L, Türk C, Skolarikos A (2021) European association of urology urolithiasis guidelines: Where are we going? Eur Urol Focus 7(1):34–38

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Knoll T, Omar MI, Maclennan S, Hernández V, Canfield S, Yuan Y et al (2018) Key steps in conducting systematic reviews for underpinning clinical practice guidelines: methodology of the European association of urology. Eur Urol 73(2):290–300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:n71

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. J. H. Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool—Appendix F. 2011;1–2

  11. Wells GASB, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V (2011) The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analysis. Oxford 2011:1

    Google Scholar 

  12. Tzelves L, Geraghty R, Lombardo R, Davis NF, Petřík A, Neisius A et al (2022) Duration of follow-up and timing of discharge from imaging follow-up, in adult patients with urolithiasis after surgical or medical intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis from the European association of urology guideline panel on urolithiasis. Eur Urol Focus 9:188–198

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Raman JD, Bagrodia A, Gupta A, Bensalah K, Cadeddu JA, Lotan Y et al (2009) Natural history of residual fragments following percutaneous nephrostolithotomy. J Urol 181(3):1163–1168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Newman DMSJ, Lingeman JE (1988) Two-year follow-up of patients treated with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Endourol 2(2):163–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Soygür T, Akbay A, Küpeli S (2002) Effect of potassium citrate therapy on stone recurrence and residual fragments after shockwave lithotripsy in lower caliceal calcium oxalate urolithiasis: a randomized controlled trial. J Endourol 16(3):149–152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Carr LK, John DAH, Jewett MA, Ibanez D, Ryan M, Bombardier C (1996) New stone formation: a comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol 155(5):1565–1567

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Mays N, Petruckevitch A, Burney PG (1992) Results of one and two year follow-up in a clinical comparison of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of renal calculi. Scand J Urol Nephrol 26(1):43–49

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zanetti G, Seveso M, Montanari E, Guarneri A, Del Nero A, Nespoli R et al (1997) Renal stone fragments following shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 158(2):352–355

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Di Silverio F, Ricciuti GP, D’Angelo AR, Fraioli A, Simeoni G (2000) Stone recurrence after lithotripsy in patients with recurrent idiopathic calcium urolithiasis: efficacy of treatment with fiuggi water. Eur Urol 37(2):145–148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sarica K, Erturhan S, Altay B (2007) Effect of verapamil on urinary stone-forming risk factors. Urol Res 35(1):23–27

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Beck EM, Riehle RA Jr (1991) The fate of residual fragments after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy monotherapy of infection stones. J Urol 145(1):6–9 (Discussion-10)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fuchs AMWB, Fuchs GJ (1991) Staghorn stone treatment with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy monotherapy: long-term results. J Endourol 5(1):45–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Fine JK, Pak CY, Preminger GM (1995) Effect of medical management and residual fragments on recurrent stone formation following shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 153(1):27–32 (Discussion-3)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yu CC, Lee YH, Huang JK, Chen MT, Chen KK, Lin AT et al (1993) Long-term stone regrowth and recurrence rates after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Br J Urol 72(5 Pt 2):688–691

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. El-Assmy A, El-Nahas AR, Madbouly K, Abdel-Khalek M, Abo-Elghar ME, Sheir KZ (2006) Extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy monotherapy of partial staghorn calculi. Prognostic factors and long-term results. Scand J Urol Nephrol 40(4):320–325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Yuruk E, Binbay M, Sari E, Akman T, Altinyay E, Baykal M et al (2010) A prospective, randomized trial of management for asymptomatic lower pole calculi. J Urol 183(4):1424–1428

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. DE Patterson SJ, Leroy AJ (1987) Long-term follow-up of patients treated by percutaneous ultrasonic lithotripsy for struvite staghorn calculi. J Endourol 1(3):177–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kang DE, Maloney MM, Haleblian GE, Springhart WP, Honeycutt EF, Eisenstein EL et al (2007) Effect of medical management on recurrent stone formation following percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol 177(5):1785–1788 (Discussion 8–9)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. El-Nahas AR, Eraky I, Shokeir AA, Shoma AM, El-Assmy AM, El-Tabey NA et al (2011) Long-term results of percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of staghorn stones. BJU Int 108(5):750–754

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Nakamoto T, Sagami K, Yamasaki A, Ueda M, Fujiwara S, Igawa M et al (1993) Long-term results of endourologic treatment of urinary calculi: investigation of risk factors for recurrence or regrowth. J Endourol 7(4):297–301

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Huei Lee Y, Chu Huang W, Chang LS, Tsun Chen M, Yang YF, Huang JK (1994) The long-term stone recurrence rate and renal function change in unilateral nephrectomy urolithiasis patients. J Urol 152(5, Part 1):1386–1388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Sleight MW, Wickham JE (1977) Long-term follow-up 100 cases of renal calculi. Br J Urol 49(7):601–604

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mortensen JT, Schultz A, Ostergaard AH (1986) Thiazides in the prophylactic treatment of recurrent idiopathic kidney stones. Int Urol Nephrol 18(3):265–269

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Brocks P, Dahl C, Wolf H, Transbøl I (1981) Do thiazides prevent recurrent idiopathic renal calcium stones? Lancet 2(8238):124–125

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Griffith DP, Gleeson MJ, Lee H, Longuet R, Deman E, Earle N (1991) Randomized, double-blind trial of Lithostat (acetohydroxamic acid) in the palliative treatment of infection-induced urinary calculi. Eur Urol 20(3):243–247

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Ohkawa M, Tokunaga S, Nakashima T, Orito M, Hisazumi H (1992) Thiazide treatment for calcium urolithiasis in patients with idiopathic hypercalciuria. Br J Urol 69(6):571–576

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ettinger B (1976) Recurrent nephrolithiasis: natural history and effect of phosphate therapy. A double-blind controlled study. Am J Med 61(2):200–206

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Hiatt RA, Ettinger B, Caan B, Quesenberry CP Jr, Duncan D, Citron JT (1996) Randomized controlled trial of a low animal protein, high fiber diet in the prevention of recurrent calcium oxalate kidney stones. Am J Epidemiol 144(1):25–33

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Hofbauer J, Höbarth K, Szabo N, Marberger M (1994) Alkali citrate prophylaxis in idiopathic recurrent calcium oxalate urolithiasis—a prospective randomized study. Br J Urol 73(4):362–365

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Borghi L, Meschi T, Amato F, Briganti A, Novarini A, Giannini A (1996) Urinary volume, water and recurrences in idiopathic calcium nephrolithiasis: a 5-year randomized prospective study. J Urol 155(3):839–843

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Borghi L, Schianchi T, Meschi T, Guerra A, Allegri F, Maggiore U et al (2002) Comparison of two diets for the prevention of recurrent stones in idiopathic hypercalciuria. N Engl J Med 346(2):77–84

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. D’Costa MR, Haley WE, Mara KC, Enders FT, Vrtiska TJ, Pais VM et al (2019) Symptomatic and radiographic manifestations of kidney stone recurrence and their prediction by risk factors: a prospective cohort study. J Am Soc Nephrol 30(7):1251–1260

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Whalley NA, Meyers AM, Martins M, Margolius LP (1996) Long-term effects of potassium citrate therapy on the formation of new stones in groups of recurrent stone formers with hypocitraturia. Br J Urol 78(1):10–14

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Jarrar K, Amasheh RA, Graef V, Weidner W (1996) Relationship between 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin-D, calcium and uric acid in urinary stone formers. Urol Int 56(1):16–20

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Trinchieri A, Boccafoschi C, Chisena S, De Angelis M, Seveso M (1999) Study of the diuretic efficacy and tolerability of therapy with Rocchetta mineral water in patients with recurrent calcium kidney stones. Arch Ital Urol Androl 71(2):121–124

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Cicerello E, Merlo F, Gambaro G, Maccatrozzo L, Fandella A, Baggio B et al (1994) Effect of alkaline citrate therapy on clearance of residual renal stone fragments after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in sterile calcium and infection nephrolithiasis patients. J Urol 151(1):5–9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Khaitan A, Gupta NP, Hemal AK, Dogra PN, Seth A, Aron M (2002) Post-ESWL, clinically insignificant residual stones: reality or myth? Urology 59(1):20–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Shigeta M, Kasaoka Y, Yasumoto H, Inoue K, Usui T, Hayashi M et al (1999) Fate of residual fragments after successful extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Int J Urol 6(4):169–172

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Streem SB (1997) Contemporary clinical practice of shock wave lithotripsy: a reevaluation of contraindications. J Urol 157(4):1197–1203

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Chen RN, Streem SB (1996) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for lower pole calculi: long-term radiographic and clinical outcome. J Urol 156(5):1572–1575

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. El-Nahas AR, El-Assmy AM, Madbouly K, Sheir KZ (2006) Predictors of clinical significance of residual fragments after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for renal stones. J Endourol 20(11):870–874

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Buchholz NP, Meier-Padel S, Rutishauser G (1997) Minor residual fragments after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: Spontaneous clearance or risk factor for recurrent stone formation? J Endourol 11(4):227–232

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Michaels EK, Fowler JE Jr (1991) Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for struvite renal calculi: prospective study with extended follow-up. J Urol 146(3):728–732

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Candau C, Saussine C, Lang H, Roy C, Faure F, Jacqmin D (2000) Natural history of residual renal stone fragments after ESWL. Eur Urol 37(1):18–22

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Osman MM, Alfano Y, Kamp S, Haecker A, Alken P, Michel MS et al (2005) 5-year-follow-up of patients with clinically insignificant residual fragments after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. Eur Urol 47(6):860–864

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Osman Y, Harraz AM, El-Nahas AR, Awad B, El-Tabey N, Shebel H et al (2013) Clinically insignificant residual fragments: An acceptable term in the computed tomography era? Urology 81(4):723–726

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Park J, Hong B, Park T, Park HK (2007) Effectiveness of noncontrast computed tomography in evaluation of residual stones after percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 21(7):684–687

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Emmott AS, Brotherhood HL, Paterson RF, Lange D, Chew BH (2018) Complications, re-intervention rates, and natural history of residual stone fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 32(1):28–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Ganpule A, Desai M (2009) Fate of residual stones after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a critical analysis. J Endourol 23(3):399–403

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Altunrende F, Tefekli A, Stein RJ, Autorino R, Yuruk E, Laydner H et al (2011) Clinically insignificant residual fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: medium-term follow-up. J Endourol 25(6):941–945

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Olvera-Posada D, Ali SN, Dion M, Alenezi H, Denstedt JD, Razvi H (2016) Natural history of residual fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: evaluation of factors related to clinical events and intervention. Urology 97:46–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Rebuck DA, Macejko A, Bhalani V, Ramos P, Nadler RB (2011) The natural history of renal stone fragments following ureteroscopy. Urology 77(3):564–568

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Kang HW, Lee SK, Kim WT, Kim YJ, Yun SJ, Lee SC et al (2013) Natural history of asymptomatic renal stones and prediction of stone related events. J Urol 189(5):1740–1746

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Ozgor F, Sahan M, Cubuk A, Ortac M, Ayranci A, Sarilar O (2019) Factors affecting infectious complications following flexible ureterorenoscopy. Urolithiasis 47(5):481–486

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Williams JJ, Rodman JS, Peterson CM (1984) A randomized double-blind study of acetohydroxamic acid in struvite nephrolithiasis. N Engl J Med 311(12):760–764

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Barcelo P, Wuhl O, Servitge E, Rousaud A, Pak CY (1993) Randomized double-blind study of potassium citrate in idiopathic hypocitraturic calcium nephrolithiasis. J Urol 150(6):1761–1764

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Sener NC, Bas O, Sener E, Zengin K, Ozturk U, Altunkol A et al (2015) Asymptomatic lower pole small renal stones: Shock wave lithotripsy, flexible ureteroscopy, or observation? A prospective randomized trial. Urology 85(1):33–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Kang M, Son H, Jeong H, Cho MC, Cho SY (2016) Clearance rates of residual stone fragments and dusts after endoscopic lithotripsy procedures using a holmium laser: 2-year follow-up results. World J Urol 34(11):1591–1597

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Koh LT, Ng FC, Ng KK (2012) Outcomes of long-term follow-up of patients with conservative management of asymptomatic renal calculi. BJU Int 109(4):622–625

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Burgher A, Beman M, Holtzman JL, Monga M (2004) Progression of nephrolithiasis: long-term outcomes with observation of asymptomatic calculi. J Endourol 18(6):534–539

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Dropkin BM, Moses RA, Sharma D, Pais VM Jr (2015) The natural history of nonobstructing asymptomatic renal stones managed with active surveillance. J Urol 193(4):1265–1269

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Kanno T, Takahashi T, Ito K, Okada T, Higashi Y, Yamada H (2020) The natural history of asymptomatic renal stones ≤ 5 mm: comparison with ≥ 5 mm. J Endourol 34(11):1188–1194

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Li X, Zhu W, Lam W, Yue Y, Duan H, Zeng G (2019) Outcomes of long-term follow-up of asymptomatic renal stones and prediction of stone-related events. BJU Int 123(3):485–492

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Inci K, Sahin A, Islamoglu E, Eren MT, Bakkaloglu M, Ozen H (2007) Prospective long-term follow-up of patients with asymptomatic lower pole caliceal stones. J Urol 177(6):2189–2192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Darrad MP, Yallappa S, Metcalfe J, Subramonian K (2018) The natural history of asymptomatic calyceal stones. BJU Int 122(2):263–269

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Moon YT, Kim SC (1993) Fate of clinically insignificant residual fragments after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy with EDAP LT-01 lithotripter. J Endourol 7(6):453–456

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Sahin C, Tuncer M, Yazıcı O, Horuz R, Çetinel AC, Eryıldırım B et al (2014) Do the residual fragments after shock wave lithotripsy affect the quality of life? Urology 84(3):549–554

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Keeley FX Jr, Tilling K, Elves A, Menezes P, Wills M, Rao N et al (2001) Preliminary results of a randomized controlled trial of prophylactic shock wave lithotripsy for small asymptomatic renal calyceal stones. BJU Int 87(1):1–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Chew BH, Brotherhood HL, Sur RL, Wang AQ, Knudsen BE, Yong C et al (2016) Natural history, complications and re-intervention rates of asymptomatic residual stone fragments after ureteroscopy: a report from the EDGE research consortium. J Urol 195(4 Pt 1):982–986

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Dai JC, Chang HC, Holt SK, Harper JD (2019) National trends in CT utilization and estimated CT-related radiation exposure in the evaluation and follow-up of stone patients. Urology 133:50–56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. El-Abd AS, Suliman MG, Abo Farha MO, Ramadan AR, El-Tatawy HH, El-Gamal OM et al (2014) The development of ureteric strictures after ureteroscopic treatment for ureteric calculi: a long-term study at two academic centres. Arab J Urol 12(2):168–172

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Fahmy NM, Elkoushy MA, Andonian S (2012) Effective radiation exposure in evaluation and follow-up of patients with urolithiasis. Urology 79(1):43–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Ferrandino MN, Bagrodia A, Pierre SA, Scales CD Jr, Rampersaud E, Pearle MS et al (2009) Radiation exposure in the acute and short-term management of urolithiasis at 2 academic centers. J Urol 181(2):668–672 (Discussion 73)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Iremashvili V, Li S, Penniston KL, Best SL, Hedican SP, Nakada SY (2019) Role of residual fragments on the risk of repeat surgery after flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy: single center study. J Urol 201(2):358–363

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Karadag MA, Tefekli A, Altunrende F, Tepeler A, Baykal M, Muslumanoglu AY (2008) Is routine radiological surveillance mandatory after uncomplicated ureteroscopic stone removal? J Endourol 22(2):261–266

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Kaynar M, Tekinarslan E, Keskin S, Buldu İ, Sönmez MG, Karatag T et al (2015) Effective radiation exposure evaluation during a one year follow-up of urolithiasis patients after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Cent Eur J Urol 68(3):348–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Li X, He L, Li J, Duan Z, Gao Z, Liu L (2015) Medium-term follow-up of clinically insignificant residual fragments after minimal invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: prognostic features and risk factors. Int J Clin Exp Med 8(11):21664–21668

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Pullar B, Lunter C, Collie J, Shah S, Shah N, Hayek S et al (2017) Do renal stones that fail lithotripsy require treatment? Urolithiasis 45(6):597–601

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Simon AF, Holmes JH, Schwartz ES (2020) Decreasing radiologist burnout through informatics-based solutions. Clin Imaging 59(2):167–171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Bos D, Kim K, Hoogenes J, Lambe S, Shayegan B, Matsumoto ED (2018) Compliance of the recurrent renal stone former with current best practice guidelines. Can Urol Assoc J 12(3):E112–E120

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. McCollough CH, Bushberg JT, Fletcher JG, Eckel LJ (2015) Answers to common questions about the use and safety of CT scans. Mayo Clin Proc 90(10):1380–1392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Gambaro G, Croppi E, Bushinsky D, Jaeger P, Cupisti A, Ticinesi A et al (2017) The risk of chronic kidney disease associated with urolithiasis and its urological treatments: a review. J Urol 198(2):268–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Skolarikos A, Straub M, Knoll T, Sarica K, Seitz C, Petřík A et al (2015) Metabolic evaluation and recurrence prevention for urinary stone patients: EAU guidelines. Eur Urol 67(4):750–763

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Serna J, Talwar R, Ziemba JB (2020) Health-related quality of life in renal stone formers: are we improving? Curr Opin Urol 30(2):190–195

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Vaughan LE, Enders FT, Lieske JC, Pais VM, Rivera ME, Mehta RA et al (2019) Predictors of symptomatic kidney stone recurrence after the first and subsequent episodes. Mayo Clin Proc 94(2):202–210

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Garg T, Polenick CA, Schoenborn N, Jih J, Hajduk A, Wei MY et al (2021) Innovative strategies to facilitate patient-centered research in multiple chronic conditions. J Clin Med 10(10):2112

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  97. Spratt DE, Shore N, Sartor O, Rathkopf D, Olivier K (2021) Treating the patient and not just the cancer: therapeutic burden in prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 24(3):647–661

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  98. Hasson F, Keeney S, McKenna H (2000) Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs 32(4):1008–1015

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funds, grants, or other support was received.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sant’Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy

    Riccardo Lombardo

  2. National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Chairman of the EAU Urolithiasis Guidelines, Department of Urology, Sismanogleio Hospital, Athens, Greece

    Lazaros Tzelves & Andreas Skolarikos

  3. Department of Urology, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, UK

    Robert Geraghty

  4. Institute of Genetic Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, UK

    Robert Geraghty

  5. Department of Urology, Connolly Hospital, Blanchardstown, Dublin 15, Ireland

    Niall F. Davis

  6. Department of Urology, Hospital of the Brothers of Mercy Trier, Medical Campus University Mainz, Trier, Germany

    Andreas Neisius

  7. Department of Urology, Region Hospital, Ceske Budejovice, Czech Republic

    Ales Petřík

  8. Department of Urology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic

    Ales Petřík

  9. Division of Nephrology and Dialysis, Department of Medicine, University of Verona, Verona, Italy

    Giovanni Gambaro

  10. Department of Urology, Hospital of the Sisters of Charity, Vienna, Austria

    Christian Türk

  11. Urologische Praxis, Vienna, Austria

    Christian Türk

  12. Department of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK

    Bhaskar Somani

  13. Department of Urology, Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital, London, UK

    Kay Thomas

Authors
  1. Riccardo Lombardo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lazaros Tzelves
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert Geraghty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Niall F. Davis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Andreas Neisius
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ales Petřík
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Giovanni Gambaro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Christian Türk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Bhaskar Somani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Kay Thomas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Andreas Skolarikos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

LR: Protocol/project development, data collection or management, data analysis, manuscript writing/editing. TL: protocol/project development, data collection or management, data analysis, manuscript writing/editing. GG: protocol/project development, data analysis, manuscript writing/editing. DNF: protocol/project development, manuscript writing/editing. NA: Protocol/project development, Manuscript writing/editing. PA: protocol/project development, manuscript writing/editing. GG: protocol/project development, manuscript writing/editing. TC: protocol/project development, manuscript writing/editing. SB: protocol/project development, manuscript writing/editing. TK: protocol/project development, manuscript writing/editing. SA: protocol/project development, manuscript writing/editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andreas Skolarikos.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Authors represent the European Association of Urology Guideline Panel on Urolithiasis.

Ethical approval

No ethical approval was needed since this study is based on a consensus using data from systematic literature review.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lombardo, R., Tzelves, L., Geraghty, R. et al. Follow-up of urolithiasis patients after treatment: an algorithm from the EAU Urolithiasis Panel. World J Urol 42, 202 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-024-04872-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-024-04872-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation