Is stone radiodensity a useful parameter for predicting outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for stones &lt; 2 cm?

Krishnamurthy, Mina S.; Ferucci, Paul; Sankey, Noel; Chandhoke, Paramjit S.

doi:10.1590/s1677-55382005000100002

Cited by 26 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The success rate in the LD group was 87.8% in our series, which was higher than that reported in previous studies [24,25]. However, in the previous studies, the stones were all <20 mm in diameter.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 72%

“…However, in the previous studies, the stones were all <20 mm in diameter. Krishnamurthy et al [25] observed that stone radiodensity alone was not effective for predicting the efficacy of lithotripsy treatment for stones <10 mm. It is possible that the influence of bowel gas or neighboring bony structures could be lower, and obtaining a density measurement is much easier for larger stones.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Treatment of Renal Stones ≥20 mm with Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy

Wang²,

Lu³

et al. 2015

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: To identify subgroups of patients with renal stones ≥20 mm that are more suitable for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) monotherapy. Methods: A total of 376 patients with renal stones ≥20 mm underwent monotherapy with ESWL. The treatment outcome was evaluated after 3 months of follow-up. A stone-free status or fragmentation of stones to 4 mm or smaller was considered efficacious. Results: At 3 months after treatment, the overall stone-free rate was 64.4%, and the efficacy rate was 70.7%. The efficacy rate was 89.4% for patients with a residual stone surface area ≤50% of baseline after the first ESWL, while the efficacy rate was 32.4% for other patients. The efficacy was 92.2% for stones ≤400 mm² and those with lower radiodensity, as determined by a plain (KUB) film. Conclusions: For renal stones with a surface area ≤400 mm² and a radiodensity equal to or less than that of the 12th rib as determined by a KUB film, ESWL may be considered the first line of treatment, even for stones with a diameter ≥20 mm. For large stones requiring repeat treatments, the surface area of the residual stones after the first ESWL is a predictor of the final treatment result.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 72%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment of Renal Stones ≥20 mm with Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy

Wang²,

Lu³

et al. 2015

Urol Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Stone radiodensity may be determined either by plain radiography or CT attenuation values. Utilizing plain X-rays the radiodensity of the stone is referred to that of the ipsilateral 12th rib [10] or to the spine [11] . The attenuation value of urinary stones measured in Hounsfield unit (HU) on CT scan seems to be more accurate as a predictor of stone composition, fragility and stone-free status after ESWL [9,12,13] .…”

Section: Stone Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

ESWL Prediction of Outcome and Failure Prevention

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on our own experiences and a review of the recent literature, this article evaluates recent developments in predicting outcomes and failures of shockwave lithotripsy when treating patients with urinary tract stones. After a detailed MEDLINE research, the authors identified several variables that influence and predict extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) success. These variables may be categorized as stone variables, patient variables and operator variables. Only multivariate analysis on a large number of homogenous patients may offer an objective evaluation of the factors conditioning ESWL outcome.

show abstract

“…In addition to stone size and location, stone radiodensity in computed tomography has been also used to predict SWL outcomes. However, Hounsfield unit of the stone is not alone a definitive factor determining success rate and it should be combined with other parameters [8]. BMI is also used as a predictive factor which is related indirectly to the distance of the stone from the skin, which reflects the SW path in the body [6].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%