CT-Based Determination of Ureteral Stone Volume: A Predictor of Spontaneous Passage.

Autor:	Zorba OÜ; 1 Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Recep Tayyip Erdoagan University , Rize, Turkey ., Ogullar S; 2 Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Recep Tayyip Erdoagan University , Rize, Turkey ., Yazar S; 1 Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Recep Tayyip Erdoagan University , Rize, Turkey ., Akca G; 1 Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Recep Tayyip Erdoagan University , Rize, Turkey .
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Journal of endourology [J Endourol] 2016 Jan; Vol. 30 (1), pp. 32-6. Date of Electronic Publication: 2015 Sep 09.
DOI:	10.1089/end.2015.0481
Abstrakt:	Introduction and Objectives: Which ureteral stone can pass spontaneously? It is hard to answer this question exactly. The size and location of the stone are the most important predictors. However, there is still a considerable gray zone that needs to be clarified. We try to identify the role of stone volume (SV) in the prediction of spontaneous passage (SP). Materials and Methods: Seventy-eight patients with a solitary ureteral stone were retrospectively evaluated. Ureter SV measurements were taken in three planes and were calculated using the following formula: V = (X) × (Y) × (Z) × 0.52. SVs, and the longest diameters (LDs) were compared between patients who passed stones spontaneously and those who needed intervention. Results: The SVs and LDs were significantly lower in patients who passed stones spontaneously than in patients who required intervention (41.2 ± 35.5 vs 128.1 ± 91.1 mm(3), p = 0.001; 5.7 ± 1.8 vs 7.4 ± 1.7 mm, p = 0.001). The optimum cutoff values were 7.0 mm and 52.6 mm(3) for the LD and SV, respectively. For those stones of ≤7 mm, the volumes of the stones that could and could not pass did not differ significantly. However, the volume of the stones >7.0 mm that could pass was significantly higher than of those that could not. SP was 30.6% for stones >7 mm; however, when we removed the stones >52.6 mm(3), SP increased to 75% for stones higher than 7 mm (p = 0.001). Conclusions: To classify ureteral stones using only one parameter such as stone diameter may lead to heterogeneity within the group. SV may be used in addition to size to determine a more definite homogeneous group to predict SP more precisely.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu