Author:
Muter Samir, ,Abd Ziad,Saeed Ruya, , ,
Abstract
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is considered a standard treatment for nephrolith or kidney stones measuring less than 20 mm. Anatomical, machine-related, and stone factors play pivotal roles in treatment outcomes, the latter being the leading role. This paper examined the relationship between stone density on native CT scans and ESWL treatment to remove renal stones concerning several treatments. One hundred and twenty patients (64 males and 56 females) were enrolled and completed the study from April 2019 to September 2020. Inclusion criteria were a single renal pelvis stone of 5–20 mm to be treated for the first time in adult patients with no urinary or musculoskeletal anatomical abnormalities. We assessed patients' renal function and obtained stone characteristics using a native CT scan. Patients were then scheduled for ESWL by the same machine and operator under fluoroscopy, with two-week intervals between treatment sessions when more than one treatment session was required. Before each new session, a new KUB-US was performed to reevaluate the stone. One hundred and twenty patient records were analyzed, 64 (53.3%) males and 56 (46.7%) females, with a mean age of 38.6 years and a mean stone size of 13.15 mm. Treatment with ESWL cleared stones in 76 (63.3%) patients, while 44 (36.7%) failed the treatment. The mean stone density in patients whose stones were cleared was significantly lower (661 vs. 1001) (P<0.001). Estimating renal calculus (or kidney stone) density on a native CT scan might help prognosticate ESWL treatment outcomes regarding stone clearance rates and the number of sessions required to clear a stone.
Publisher
S.C. JURNALUL PENTRU MEDICINA SI VIATA S.R.L
Reference25 articles.
1. 1. Herout R, Baunacke M, Groeben C, Aksoy C, et al. Contemporary treatment trends for upper urinary tract stones in a total population analysis in Germany from 2006 to 2019: will shock wave lithotripsy become extinct? World J Urol. 2022; 40(1):185-191. doi: 10.1007/s00345-021-03818-y
2. 2. Iqbal N, Hassan A, Singh G, Hassan MH, et al. use of computed tomographybased nomogram in adult age patients to predict success rates after shock wave lithotripsy for renal stones: a single center experience. J Ayub Med Coll. 2021; 33(3):386-392.
3. 3. Fan J, Zhang T, Zhu W, Gurioli A, et al. The role of super-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SMP) in the treatment of symptomatic lower pole renal stones (LPSs) after the failure of shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Urolithiasis. 2019; 47(3):297-301. doi: 10.1007/ s00240-018-1068-4
4. 4. Dretler SP, Polykoff G. Calcium oxalate stone morphology: fine tuning our therapeutic distinctions. J Urol. 1996;155:828–833. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(01)66319-5
5. 5. Jacobsen MC, Thrower SL, Ger RB, Leng S, et al. Multi-energy computed tomography and material quantification: Current barriers and opportunities for advancement. Medical Physics. 2020; 47(8):3752-3771. doi: 10.1002/ mp.14241