Literature DB >> 23465152

Clinically insignificant residual fragments: an acceptable term in the computed tomography era?

Yasser Osman1, Ahmed M Harraz, Ahmed R El-Nahas, Bassam Awad, Naser El-Tabey, Haytham Shebel, Ahmed M Shoma, Ibrahim Eraky, Mahmoud El-Kenawy.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical relevance of small, asymptomatic, noninfection residual stone fragments (≤5 mm) after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL), evaluated using spiral noncontrast-enhanced computed tomography (NCCT).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present retrospective study included 75 patients who underwent PNL and were proved to have a single residual caliceal stone ≤5 mm as evaluated postoperatively by NCCT. All patients were free of urinary tract infections. The outcome of these residual fragments (RFs) were reassessed ≥12 months later using NCCT.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 36.2 ± 20.1 months (range 12-96). Of the 75 evaluated patients, 25 (33.3%) passed the stones spontaneously during the follow-up period, 22 (29.35%) had stable asymptomatic RFs, 25 (33.3%) showed regrowth of the RFs, and 3 patients (4%) presented with slippage of the stones into the ureter. Asymptomatic patients with stable RFs elected to continue follow-up. For the remaining patients, 14 (18.7%) and 9 (12%) were referred to shock wave lithotripsy and PNL, respectively. The 3 patients with ureteral stones were treated with ureteroscopy. Only the RF size (>3 mm) correlated significantly with RF growth or ureteral obstruction (odds ratio 1.882, 95% confidence interval 0.919-3.854; P = .05).
CONCLUSION: Small RFs (≤5 mm) after PNL, as assessed by NCCT, should be expected to require active intervention in one third of the patients at intermediate follow-up. A small, single, RF (≤3 mm), as assessed by NCCT, can be considered clinically insignificant.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23465152     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.01.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  14 in total

1.  Medium-term follow-up of clinically insignificant residual fragments after minimal invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: prognostic features and risk factors.

Authors:  Xin Li; Long He; Jianzhong Li; Zhongyang Duan; Zijian Gao; Long Liu
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-11-15

2.  Using a three-dimensional computer assisted stone volume estimates to evaluate extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy treatment of kidney stones.

Authors:  Lene Hyldgaard Bigum; Peter Sommer Ulriksen; Omar Salah Omar
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2016-02-25       Impact factor: 3.436

3.  Residual stones after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: comparison of intraoperative assessment and postoperative non-contrast computerized tomography.

Authors:  Ahmed M Harraz; Yasser Osman; Ahmed R El-Nahas; Amr A Elsawy; Islam Fakhreldin; Osama Mahmoud; Ahmed El-Assmy; Ahmed A Shokeir
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-12-24       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 4.  Uncovering the real outcomes of active renal stone treatment by utilizing non-contrast computer tomography: a systematic review of the current literature.

Authors:  Theodoros Tokas; Martin Habicher; Daniel Junker; Thomas Herrmann; Jan Peter Jessen; Thomas Knoll; Udo Nagele
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Stone free rates (SFRs) after retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL); are we comparing apples with watermelons?

Authors:  Theodoros Tokas; Udo Nagele
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-03-26       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  Future of kidney stone surgery: will we treat small stones with large-sized PCNL and big stones with RIRS?

Authors:  Udo Nagele; Theodoros Tokas; Olivier Traxer
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-10-18       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 7.  What is the stone-free rate following flexible ureteroscopy for kidney stones?

Authors:  Khurshid R Ghani; J Stuart Wolf; J Stuart Wolf
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 14.432

8.  Trends of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in Saudi Arabia.

Authors:  Wissam Khalid Kamal; Ali Alhazmy; Majed Alharthi; Aiman Al Solumany
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2020-10-15

Review 9.  Clinical significance of residual fragments in 2015: impact, detection, and how to avoid them.

Authors:  Simon Hein; Arkadiusz Miernik; Konrad Wilhelm; Fabian Adams; Daniel Schlager; Thomas R W Herrmann; Jens J Rassweiler; Martin Schoenthaler
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-10-23       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  Comparison of standard- and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy for staghorn stones.

Authors:  Sanjay Khadgi; Ahmed R El-Nahas; Mohamed El-Shazly; Abdullatif Al-Terki
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2021-01-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.