The success of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy based on the stone-attenuation value from non-contrast computed tomography
- PMID: 26019941
- PMCID: PMC4434685
- DOI: 10.1016/j.aju.2014.01.002
The success of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy based on the stone-attenuation value from non-contrast computed tomography
Abstract
Objective: To determine the utility of the urinary stone-attenuation value (SAV, in Hounsfield units, HU) from non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) for predicting the success of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL).
Patients and methods: The study included 305 patients with renal calculi of ⩽30 mm and upper ureteric calculi of ⩽20 mm. The SAV was measured using NCCT. Numerical variables were compared using a one-way analysis of variance with posthoc multiple two-group comparisons. Univariate and multivariate regression analysis models were used to test the preferential effect of the independent variable(s) on the success of ESWL.
Results: Patients were grouped according to the SAV as group 1 (⩽500 HU, 81 patients), group 2 (501-1000 HU, 141 patients) and group 3 (>1000 HU, 83 patients). ESWL was successful in 253 patients (83%). The rate of stone clearance was 100% in group 1, 95.7% (135/141) in group 2 and 44.6% (37/83) in group 3 (P = 0.001).
Conclusions: The SAV value is an independent predictor of the success of ESWL and a useful tool for planning stone treatment. Patients with a SAV ⩾956 HU are not ideal candidates for ESWL. The inclusion criteria for ESWL of stones with a SAV <500 HU can be expanded with regard to stone size, site, age, renal function and coagulation profile. In patients with a SAV of 500-1000 HU, factors like a body mass index of >30 kg/m(2) and a lower calyceal location make them less ideal for ESWL.
Keywords: BMI; BMI, body mass index; ESWL; HU, Hounsfield unit; Lower calyceal stone; NCCT, non-contrast computed tomography; ROC, receiver operating characteristic (curve); SAV, stone-attenuation value; Stone attenuation value; US, ultrasonography; Urinary calculi.
Figures
References
-
- Wolf J.S., Clayman R.V. Percutaneous nephrostolithotomy. What is its role in 1997. Urol Clin N Am. 1997;24:43–58. - PubMed
-
- Lingeman J.E., Newman D., Mertz J.H., Mosbaugh P.G., Steele R.E., Kahnoski R.J. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: the Methodist Indiana experience. J Urol. 1996;135:1134–1137. - PubMed
-
- Rassweiler J.J., Renner C., Chaussy C., Thüroff S. Treatment of renal stones by extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: an update. Eur Urol. 2001;39:187–199. - PubMed
-
- Pareek G., Armenakas N.A., Panagopoulos G., Bruno J.J., Fracchia J.A. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy success based on body mass index and Hounsfield units. Urology. 2005;65:33–36. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources