Literature DB >> 24612615

Utility of the Guy's stone score based on computed tomographic scan findings for predicting percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes.

Fabio C Vicentini1, Giovanni Scala Marchini2, Eduardo Mazzucchi2, Joaquim F A Claro3, Miguel Srougi2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of the Guy's stone score (GS) to predict the success rates and complications on the basis of the computed tomographic (CT) scan findings for renal stones treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).
METHODS: From 2008 to 2012, a total of 147 consecutive patients (155 renal units) who underwent PCNL in a completely supine position were prospectively evaluated. All patients underwent a CT scan preoperatively, and the stones were classified according to the GS. All PCNLs were analyzed to determine the association between the GS and treatment outcomes on the basis of CT findings and complications, according to the Clavien criteria.
RESULTS: Of the 155 PCNLs, 27% were classified as GS1, 28.4% as GS2, 27% as GS3, and 17.6% as GS4. Only the largest diameter of the stones differed among the groups (GS1=21.4, GS2=26.5, GS3=31.4, and GS4=50.5 mm; P<.001). After stratification according to the GS, the groups differed significantly regarding their operative times (GS1=63±28.5, GS2=101.4±40.8, GS3=127.6±47.6, and GS4=153.3±56 minutes; P<.001), tubeless rates (GS1=54.8%, GS2=45.4%, GS3=28.6%, and GS4=7.4%; P<.001), blood transfusion rates (GS1=0%, GS2=2.3%, GS3=4.8%, and GS4=22.2%; P=.01), complications (GS1=4.8%, GS2=9.1%, GS3=26.2%, and GS4=44.4%; P<.001), immediate success rates (GS1=95.2%, GS2=79.5%, GS3=59.5%, and GS4=40.7%; P<.001), and number of auxiliary procedures (GS1=0.05±0.32, GS2=0.28±0.6, GS3=0.35±0.66, and GS4=0.43±0.59; P=.031). The final success rates after the auxiliary procedures were similar among the groups (GS1=97.6%, GS2=86.4%, GS3=90.5%, and GS4=74.5%; P=.19).
CONCLUSION: The GS based on CT findings accurately predicted success rates and complications after PCNL for renal stones.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24612615     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2013.12.041

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


  28 in total

1.  External validation of the S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry scoring system.

Authors:  Yasser A Noureldin; Mohamed A Elkoushy; Sero Andonian
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for staghorn stones: Which nomogram can better predict postoperative outcomes?

Authors:  Stavros Sfoungaristos; Ofer N Gofrit; Dov Pode; Ezekiel H Landau; Mordechai Duvdevani
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-12-11       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  The evolution of percutaneous nephrolithotomy: Analysis of a single institution experience over 25 years.

Authors:  Jennifer Bjazevic; Linda Nott; Philippe D Violette; Thomas Tailly; Marie Dion; John D Denstedt; Hassan Razvi
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Nephrolithometric Scoring Systems to Predict Outcomes of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Simone L Vernez; Zhamshid Okhunov; Piruz Motamedinia; Vincent Bird; Zeph Okeke; Arthur Smith
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2016

5.  Which is better? Guy's versus S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry scoring systems in predicting stone-free status post-percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Authors:  Yasser A Noureldin; Mohamed A Elkoushy; Sero Andonian
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-02-13       Impact factor: 4.226

6.  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

7.  Do 3D-calculated volume distribution of a stone in pelvicalyceal system affect complications of percutaneous nephrolithotomy?

Authors:  Sait Özbir; Hasan Anıl Atalay; Halil Lütfi Canat; Mehmet Gökhan Çulha
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2018-08-14       Impact factor: 3.436

8.  Ultra-mini PCNL versus flexible ureteroscopy: a matched analysis of analgesic consumption and treatment-related patient satisfaction in patients with renal stones 10-35 mm.

Authors:  Konrad Wilhelm; Simon Hein; Fabian Adams; Daniel Schlager; Arkadiusz Miernik; Martin Schoenthaler
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-05-14       Impact factor: 4.226

9.  Prediction of stone-free status and complication rates after tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a comparative and retrospective study using three stone-scoring systems and preoperative parameters.

Authors:  Sae Woong Choi; Woong Jin Bae; U-Syn Ha; Sung-Hoo Hong; Ji Youl Lee; Sae Woong Kim; Hyuk Jin Cho
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 4.226

10.  Do the urolithiasis scoring systems predict the success of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in cases with anatomical abnormalities?

Authors:  Ramazan Kocaaslan; Abdulkadir Tepeler; Ibrahim Buldu; Muhammed Tosun; Mehmet Mazhar Utangac; Tolga Karakan; Ekrem Ozyuvali; Namik Kemal Hatipoglu; Ali Unsal; Kemal Sarica
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 3.436

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.