Michael G Selby1, Terri J Vrtiska2, Amy E Krambeck3, Cynthia H McCollough2, Hisham E Elsherbiny1, Eric J Bergstralh4, John C Lieske1, Andrew D Rule5. 1. Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 2. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 3. Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 4. Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 5. Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Division of Epidemiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. Electronic address: rule.andrew@mayo.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To find the optimal characterization of asymptomatic radiographic stone burden on computed tomography (CT) scans. METHODS: A survey was sent to stone formers who underwent a CT scan while asymptomatic during a stone clinic evaluation. Symptomatic stone passage events after CT scan were detected by survey and medical record review. Radiographic stone burden was quantified by number of stones, largest stone diameter, automated total stone volume (TSV), and bilateral stones and then compared as predictors of stone events. RESULTS: There were 550 stone formers; 43% had a stone event for a median of 4.7 years after the CT scan. Stone burden by quartiles was 0-1, 2-3, 4-6, and ≥7 for number of stones; 0-2, 3-4, 5-7, and ≥8 mm for largest stone diameter; and 0-8, 9-78, 79-280, and ≥281 mm(3) for TSV; 48% had bilateral stones. The hazard ratios (HRs) for symptomatic event was 1.30 (P <.001) for the number of stones per quartile, 1.26 (P <.001) for largest stone diameter per quartile, 1.38 (P <.001) for TSV per quartile, and 1.80 (P <.001) for bilateral stones. On multivariate analysis, only TSV was an independent predictor of symptomatic events (HR, 1.35 per quartile; P = .01). This risk of events with TSV was also independent of demographics, urine chemistries, and stone composition. Among the 53 patients with interim events between CT scans, a rapid increase in TSV between CT scans (>570 mm(3) per year) predicted subsequent events (HR, 2.8; P = .05). CONCLUSION: Automated TSV is more predictive of symptomatic events than manual methods for quantifying stone burden on CT scan.
OBJECTIVE: To find the optimal characterization of asymptomatic radiographic stone burden on computed tomography (CT) scans. METHODS: A survey was sent to stone formers who underwent a CT scan while asymptomatic during a stone clinic evaluation. Symptomatic stone passage events after CT scan were detected by survey and medical record review. Radiographic stone burden was quantified by number of stones, largest stone diameter, automated total stone volume (TSV), and bilateral stones and then compared as predictors of stone events. RESULTS: There were 550 stone formers; 43% had a stone event for a median of 4.7 years after the CT scan. Stone burden by quartiles was 0-1, 2-3, 4-6, and ≥7 for number of stones; 0-2, 3-4, 5-7, and ≥8 mm for largest stone diameter; and 0-8, 9-78, 79-280, and ≥281 mm(3) for TSV; 48% had bilateral stones. The hazard ratios (HRs) for symptomatic event was 1.30 (P <.001) for the number of stones per quartile, 1.26 (P <.001) for largest stone diameter per quartile, 1.38 (P <.001) for TSV per quartile, and 1.80 (P <.001) for bilateral stones. On multivariate analysis, only TSV was an independent predictor of symptomatic events (HR, 1.35 per quartile; P = .01). This risk of events with TSV was also independent of demographics, urine chemistries, and stone composition. Among the 53 patients with interim events between CT scans, a rapid increase in TSV between CT scans (>570 mm(3) per year) predicted subsequent events (HR, 2.8; P = .05). CONCLUSION: Automated TSV is more predictive of symptomatic events than manual methods for quantifying stone burden on CT scan.
Authors: Sutchin R Patel; Paul Stanton; Nathan Zelinski; Edward J Borman; Myron A Pozniak; Stephen Y Nakada; Perry J Pickhardt Journal: J Urol Date: 2011-10-20 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Sijo J Parekattil; Udaya Kumar; Nicholas J Hegarty; Clay Williams; Tara Allen; Patrick Teloken; Victor A Leitão; Nelson R Netto; Georges-Pascal Haber; Charles Ballereau; Arnauld Villers; Stevan B Streem; Mark D White; Michael E Moran Journal: J Urol Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Alice E Huang; Juan C Montoya; Maria Shiung; Shuai Leng; Cynthia H McCollough Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2017-04-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Matthew R D'Costa; William E Haley; Kristin C Mara; Felicity T Enders; Terri J Vrtiska; Vernon M Pais; Steven J Jacobsen; Cynthia H McCollough; John C Lieske; Andrew D Rule Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2019-06-07 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: David T Tzou; Dylan Isaacson; Manint Usawachintachit; Zhen J Wang; Kazumi Taguchi; Nancy K Hills; Ryan S Hsi; Benjamin A Sherer; Shalonda Reliford-Titus; Brian Duty; Jonathan D Harper; Mathew Sorensen; Roger L Sur; Marshall L Stoller; Thomas Chi Journal: Urology Date: 2017-10-13 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Lisa E Vaughan; Felicity T Enders; John C Lieske; Vernon M Pais; Marcelino E Rivera; Ramila A Mehta; Terri J Vrtiska; Andrew D Rule Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2018-12-04 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Prince Singh; Felicity T Enders; Lisa E Vaughan; Eric J Bergstralh; John J Knoedler; Amy E Krambeck; John C Lieske; Andrew D Rule Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2015-09-06 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Matthew R D'Costa; Annamaria T Kausz; Kevin J Carroll; Jóhann P Ingimarsson; Felicity T Enders; Kristin C Mara; Ramila A Mehta; John C Lieske Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2021-12-02 Impact factor: 5.992