Ryan S Hsi1, Phyllis L Yan2, David S Goldfarb3, Ada Egbuji2, Yajuan Si4, Vahakn Shahinian5, John M Hollingsworth6. 1. Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN. 2. Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 3. Nephrology Section, VA New York Harbor Healthcare System, New York, NY; Division of Nephrology, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, NY. 4. Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 5. Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 6. Dow Division of Health Services Research, Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. Electronic address: kinks@med.umich.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of an empiric approach to metabolic stone prevention. METHODS: Using medical claims from a cohort of working age adults with kidney stone diagnoses (2008-2017), we identified the subset who were prescribed thiazides, alkali therapy, or allopurinol-collectively known as preventive pharmacologic therapy (PPT). We distinguished between those who had 24-hour urine testing prior to initiating PPT (selective therapy) from those without it (empiric therapy). We conducted a survival analysis for time to first recurrence for stone-related events, including ED visits, hospitalizations, and surgery, up to 2 years after initiating PPT. RESULTS: Of 10,125 patients identified, 2744 (27%) and 7381 (73%) received selective and empiric therapy, respectively. The overall frequency of any stone-related event was 11%, and this did not differ between the 2 groups on bivariate analysis (P = .29). After adjusting for sociodemographic factors, comorbidities, medication class, and adherence, there was no difference in the hazard of a stone-related event between the selective and empiric therapy groups (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.12). When considered individually, the frequency of ED visits, hospitalizations, and surgeries did not differ between groups. Greater adherence to PPT and older age were associated with a lower hazard of a stone-related event (both P < .05). CONCLUSION: Compared to empiric therapy, PPT guided by 24-hour urine testing, on average, is not associated with a lower hazard of a stone-related event. These results suggest a need to identify kidney stone patients who benefit from 24-hour urine testing.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of an empiric approach to metabolic stone prevention. METHODS: Using medical claims from a cohort of working age adults with kidney stone diagnoses (2008-2017), we identified the subset who were prescribed thiazides, alkali therapy, or allopurinol-collectively known as preventive pharmacologic therapy (PPT). We distinguished between those who had 24-hour urine testing prior to initiating PPT (selective therapy) from those without it (empiric therapy). We conducted a survival analysis for time to first recurrence for stone-related events, including ED visits, hospitalizations, and surgery, up to 2 years after initiating PPT. RESULTS: Of 10,125 patients identified, 2744 (27%) and 7381 (73%) received selective and empiric therapy, respectively. The overall frequency of any stone-related event was 11%, and this did not differ between the 2 groups on bivariate analysis (P = .29). After adjusting for sociodemographic factors, comorbidities, medication class, and adherence, there was no difference in the hazard of a stone-related event between the selective and empiric therapy groups (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.12). When considered individually, the frequency of ED visits, hospitalizations, and surgeries did not differ between groups. Greater adherence to PPT and older age were associated with a lower hazard of a stone-related event (both P < .05). CONCLUSION: Compared to empiric therapy, PPT guided by 24-hour urine testing, on average, is not associated with a lower hazard of a stone-related event. These results suggest a need to identify kidney stone patients who benefit from 24-hour urine testing.
Authors: Casey A Dauw; Yooni Yi; Maggie J Bierlein; Phyllis Yan; Abdulrahman F Alruwaily; Khurshid R Ghani; J Stuart Wolf; Brent K Hollenbeck; John M Hollingsworth Journal: J Urol Date: 2015-10-17 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Margaret S Pearle; David S Goldfarb; Dean G Assimos; Gary Curhan; Cynthia J Denu-Ciocca; Brian R Matlaga; Manoj Monga; Kristina L Penniston; Glenn M Preminger; Thomas M T Turk; James R White Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-05-20 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Pietro Manuel Ferraro; Eric N Taylor; Brian H Eisner; Giovanni Gambaro; Eric B Rimm; Kenneth J Mukamal; Gary C Curhan Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-07-24 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: John M Hollingsworth; Edward C Norton; Samuel R Kaufman; R Matt Smith; J Stuart Wolf; Brent K Hollenbeck Journal: J Urol Date: 2013-03-19 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ryan S Hsi; Phyllis L Yan; Joseph J Crivelli; David S Goldfarb; Vahakn Shahinian; John M Hollingsworth Journal: Urology Date: 2022-05-08 Impact factor: 2.633
Authors: Ryan S Hsi; Phyllis L Yan; Joseph J Crivelli; David S Goldfarb; Vahakn Shahinian; John M Hollingsworth Journal: Urology Date: 2022-02-17 Impact factor: 2.633