Staghorn classification: Platform for morphometry assessment
- PMID: 24497688
- PMCID: PMC3897060
- DOI: 10.4103/0970-1591.124212
Staghorn classification: Platform for morphometry assessment
Abstract
Introduction: The majority of staghorn classifications do not incorporate volumetric stone burden assessment. Accurate volumetric data can easily be acquired with the ever-increasingly available computerized tomography (CT) scan. This manuscript reviews the available staghorn stone classifications and rationalizes the morphometry-based classification.
Materials and methods: A Pubmed search was performed for articles concerning staghorn classification and morphometry. Twenty abstracts were shortlisted from a total of 43 published abstracts. In view of the paucity of manuscripts on staghorn morphometry (4), older staghorn classifications were analyzed with the aim to determine the most optimum one having relevance to the percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) monotherapy outcome.
Results: All available staghorn classifications are limited with non-widespread applicability. The traditional partial and complete staghorn are limited due to non-descript stone volumetric data and considerable overlap of the intermediate ones in either group. A lack of standardized definition limits intergroup comparison as well. Staghorn morphometry is a recent addition to the clinical classification profiling of a staghorn calculus. It comprises extensive CT volumetric stone distribution assessment of a staghorn in a given pelvi-calyceal anatomy. It allowsmeaningful clinical classification of staghorn stones from a contemporary PCNL monotherapy perspective.
Conclusions: Morphometry-based classification affords clinically relevant nomenclature in predicting the outcome of PCNL for staghorn stones. Further research is required to reduce the complexity associated with measuring the volumetric stone distribution in a given calyceal system.
Keywords: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; staghorn classification; staghorn morphometry; staghorn stones; stone classification.
Conflict of interest statement
References
-
- Preminger GM, Assimos DG, Lingeman JE, Nakada SY, Pearle MS, Wolf JS., Jr AUA Nephrolithiasis Guideline Panel). Chapter 1: AUA guideline on management of staghorn calculi: Diagnosis and treatment recommendations. J Urol. 2005;173:1991–2000. - PubMed
-
- Takeuchi H, Yoshida O. Treatment of staghorn calculi on the basis of composition and structure. Hinyokika Kiyo. 1993;39:1071–6. - PubMed
-
- Bhatta KM, Prien EL, Jr, Dretler SP. Cystine calculi--rough and smooth: A new clinical distinction. J Urol. 1989;142:937–40. - PubMed
-
- Rocco F, Mandressi A, Larcher P. Surgical classification of renal calculi. EurUrol. 1984;10:121–3. - PubMed
-
- Griffith DP, Valiquette L. PICA/burden: A staging system for upper tract urinary stones. J Urol. 1987;138:253–7. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
