21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Ureteral stenting can be a negative predictor for successful outcome following shock wave lithotripsy in patients with ureteral stones

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          To evaluate ureteral stenting as a negative predictive factor influencing ureteral stone clearance and to estimate the probability of one-session success in shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) patients with a ureteral stone.

          Materials and Methods

          We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 1,651 patients who underwent their first SWL. Among these patients, 680 had a ureteral stone measuring 4–20 mm and were thus eligible for our study. The 57 patients who underwent ureteral stenting during SWL were identified. Maximal stone length (MSL), mean stone density (MSD), skin-to-stone distance (SSD), and stone heterogeneity index (SHI) were determined by pre-SWL noncontrast computed tomography.

          Results

          After propensity score matching, 399 patients were extracted from the total patient cohort. There were no significant differences between stenting and stentless groups after matching, except for a higher one-session success rate in the stentless group (78.6% vs. 49.1%, p=0.026). In multivariate analysis, shorter MSL, lower MSD, higher SHI, and absence of a stent were positive predictors for one-session success in patients who underwent SWL. Using cutoff values of MSL and MSD obtained from receiver operator curve analysis, in patients with a lower MSD (≤784 HU), the success rate was lower in those with a stent (61.1%) than in those without (83.5%) (p=0.001). However, in patients with a higher MSL (>10 mm), the success rate was lower in those with a stent (23.6%) than in those without (52.2%) (p=0.002).

          Conclusions

          Ureteral stenting during SWL was a negative predictor of one-session success in patients with a ureteral stone.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Matching using estimated propensity scores: relating theory to practice.

          Matched sampling is a standard technique in the evaluation of treatments in observational studies. Matching on estimated propensity scores comprises an important class of procedures when there are numerous matching variables. Recent theoretical work (Rubin, D. B. and Thomas, N., 1992, The Annals of Statistics 20, 1079-1093) on affinely invariant matching methods with ellipsoidal distributions provides a general framework for evaluating the operating characteristics of such methods. Moreover, Rubin and Thomas (1992, Biometrika 79, 797-809) uses this framework to derive several analytic approximations under normality for the distribution of the first two moments of the matching variables in samples obtained by matching on estimated linear propensity scores. Here we provide a bridge between these theoretical approximations and actual practice. First, we complete and refine the nomal-based analytic approximations, thereby making it possible to apply these results to practice. Second, we perform Monte Carlo evaluations of the analytic results under normal and nonnormal ellipsoidal distributions, which confirm the accuracy of the analytic approximations, and demonstrate the predictable ways in which the approximations deviate from simulation results when normal assumptions are violated within the ellipsoidal family. Third, we apply the analytic approximations to real data with clearly nonellipsoidal distributions, and show that the theoretical expressions, although derived under artificial distributional conditions, produce useful guidance for practice. Our results delineate the wide range of settings in which matching on estimated linear propensity scores performs well, thereby providing useful information for the design of matching studies. When matching with a particular data set, our theoretical approximations provide benchmarks for expected performance under favorable conditions, thereby identifying matching variables requiring special treatment. After matching is complete and data analysis is at hand, our results provide the variances required to compute valid standard errors for common estimators.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A prospective multivariate analysis of factors predicting stone disintegration by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: the value of high-resolution noncontrast computed tomography.

            To assess the value of noncontrast computed tomography (NCCT) as a possible predictor of renal stone disintegration by shock wave lithotripsy (SWL). The study included 120 consecutive patients (71 males, 49 females; mean age: 42.6 yr) with a solitary renal stone of 0.5-2.5 cm in length. NCCT was performed using a multidetector row CT scanner at 120 KV and 240 mA, with 1.25-mm collimation. A bone window was used to measure stone attenuation values. SWL was performed with an electromagnetic lithotripter. Failure of disintegration was defined as no fragmentation of the stone after three sessions. The impact of patients' sex, age, and body mass index (BMI) and the stones' laterality, location, volume, mean attenuation value, and the skin-to-stone distance on disintegration were evaluated by univariate and multivariate analyses. Failure of disintegration was observed in 15 patients (12.5%). BMI and stone density >1000 HU were the significant independent predictors of failure (p=0.04 and 0.02, respectively). The success rate of extracorporeal SWL at 3 mo was 87.5% (105 of 120 patients); 90 patients were stone free and 15 had residual fragments 1000 HU.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Hounsfield units on computerized tomography predict stone-free rates after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.

              Studies suggest that HU values on non-contrast computerized tomography may predict the ability to fragment urinary calculi. We determined whether the HUs of in vivo urinary stones could be used to predict the stone-free rates after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. We evaluated 50 patients who underwent extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for 5 to 10 mm. upper urinary tract stones. Chemical analyses and HU calculations were performed for each stone and posttreatment radiographic assessment categorized patients into a stone-free or a residual stone group. Statistical analysis was performed using the Student t test to compare mean HU values in the 2 groups. Of the patients 32 (64%) were stone-free and 18 (36%) had residual stones. Mean values +/- SEM for the stone-free and residual stone groups were significantly different (551.20 +/- 46.66 versus 926.20 +/- 51.42 HU, p <0.0001). A total of 30 calculi (60%) were located in the ureter, including 21 in the stone-free group and 9 in the residual stone group with a mean value of 505.10 +/- 46.66 and 888.70 +/- 102.00 HU, respectively, which was significantly different (p = 0.0005). A total of 20 calculi (40%) were located in the kidney, including 11 in the stone-free group and 9 in the residual stone group with a mean value of 558.40 +/- 62.38 and 905.10 +/- 61.49 HU, respectively, which was significantly different (p = 0.001). These findings suggest that HU measurement of urinary calculi on pretreatment non-contrast computerized tomography may predict the stone-free rate. This information may be beneficial for selecting the preferred treatment option for patients with urinary calculi.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Investig Clin Urol
                Investig Clin Urol
                ICU
                Investigative and Clinical Urology
                The Korean Urological Association
                2466-0493
                2466-054X
                November 2016
                24 October 2016
                : 57
                : 6
                : 408-416
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Urology, Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
                [2 ]Department of Urology, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
                [3 ]Department of Urology, Severance Check-Up, Yonsei University Health System, Seoul, Korea.
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Joo Yong Lee. Department of Urology, Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03722, Korea. TEL: +82-2-2228-2320, FAX: +82-2-312-2538, joouro@ 123456yuhs.ac
                Article
                10.4111/icu.2016.57.6.408
                5109799
                7fffe6e9-9135-4abf-aeab-c00ace229afc
                © The Korean Urological Association, 2016

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 20 June 2016
                : 08 September 2016
                Funding
                Funded by: Yonsei University College of Medicine, CrossRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100008005;
                Award ID: 6-2014-0156
                Categories
                Original Article
                Endourology/Urolithiasis

                lithotripsy,stents,treatment outcome,ureter,urinary calculi
                lithotripsy, stents, treatment outcome, ureter, urinary calculi

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                20
                2
                16
                0
                Smart Citations
                20
                2
                16
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content467

                Cited by13

                Most referenced authors233