Is it possible to predict spontaneous passage of a ureteral stone? An up-to-date comment on the current problem with new concepts concerning the patient and the stone
- PMID: 36381165
 - PMCID: PMC9628730
 - DOI: 10.5173/ceju.2022.0029
 
Is it possible to predict spontaneous passage of a ureteral stone? An up-to-date comment on the current problem with new concepts concerning the patient and the stone
Abstract
Introduction: The aim of this article was to determine a predictive factor by examining the patient's characteristics and the stone to predict the ureteral stone spontaneous passage.
Material and methods: A total of 200 patients aged 18-55 who were referred with middle and distal ureter ureteral stones between 5-7 mm were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were randomized as 50 spontaneous stone passage positive (SSPP) and 50 negative patients. Body mass index (BMI), waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), stone size, ureter length, ureter diameter, stone Hounsfield unit value (SHU), ureteral wall thickness (UWT), kidney parenchymal thickness (KPT), kidney parenchymal density, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and thrombocyte-lymphocyte ratio (TLR) values were recorded.
Results: The average SHU of the SSPP group was 579 and 970 in the negative group (p: 0.000). While the mean was 1.7 mm in the UWT SSPP group, it was 2.4 mm in the negative group (p: 0.000). SHU and UWT were statistically significantly different in univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. WHR values were 39.6 and 29.3 for SSPP and the negative group, respectively (p: 0.032). The ureter diameter was 7.6 mm for the SSPP group and 8.9 mm in the negative group (p: 0.01).
Conclusions: Low SHU value is related to the ureteral stone's positive spontaneous passage, and the increase of UWT is inversely related to the spontaneous passage. WHR is higher in people who can passage ureteral stones. A narrow ureter diameter is correlated with spontaneous stone passage. Ureter length, KPT, and kidney parenchymal density were not associated with spontaneous passage.
Keywords: passage; stone; ureter.
Copyright by Polish Urological Association.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Figures
References
- 
    
- Türk C, Petřík A, Sarica K, et al. . EAU Guidelines on Diagnosis and Conservative Management of Urolithiasis. Eur Urol. 2016; 69: 468-474. - PubMed
 
 - 
    
- Bader MJ, Eisner B, Porpiglia F, Preminger GM, Tiselius H-G. Contemporary management of ureteral stones. Eur Urol. 2012; 61: 764-772. - PubMed
 
 - 
    
- Preminger GM, Tiselius H-G, Assimos DG, et al. . Guideline for the management of ureteral calculi. Eur Urol. 2007; 52: 1610-1631. - PubMed
 
 - 
    
- Tzelves L, Mourmouris P, Skolarikos A. Comparison of current guidelines on medical management of stone disease. Arch Esp Urol. 2021; 74: 171-182. - PubMed
 
 - 
    
- Ibrahim AI, Shetty SD, Awad RM, Patel KP. Prognostic factors in the conservative treatment of ureteric stones. Br J Urol. 1991; 67: 358-361. - PubMed
 
 
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources