Does volume matter? Incorporating estimated stone volume in a nomogram to predict ureteral stone passage

dc.contributor.authorAbou Heidar, Nassib F.
dc.contributor.authorLabban, Muhieddine Saadeddine
dc.contributor.authorNguyen, David Dan
dc.contributor.authorEl-Achkar, Adnan
dc.contributor.authorMansour, Mazen M.
dc.contributor.authorBhojani, Naeem
dc.contributor.authorNasr, Rami Wajih
dc.contributor.departmentSurgery
dc.contributor.departmentDivision of Urology
dc.contributor.facultyFaculty of Medicine (FM)
dc.contributor.institutionAmerican University of Beirut
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-24T12:13:37Z
dc.date.available2025-01-24T12:13:37Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: Recent studies have shown that software-generated 3D stone volume calculations are better predictors of stone burden than measured maximal axial stone diameter. However, no studies have assessed the role of formula estimated stone volume, a more practical and cheaper alternative to software calculations, to predict spontaneous stone passage (SSP). Methods: We retrospectively included patients discharged from our emergency department on conservative treatment for ureteral stone (10 mm). We collected patient demographics, comorbidities, and laboratory tests. Using non-contrast computed tomography (CT) reports, stone width, length, and depth (w, l, d, respectively) were used to estimate stone volumes using the ellipsoid formula: V=π*l*w*d*0.167. Using a backward conditional regression, two models were developed incorporating either estimated stone volume or maximal axial stone diameter. A receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve was constructed and the area under the curve (AUC) was computed and compared to the other model. Results: We included 450 patients; 243 patients (54%) had SSP and 207 patients (46%) failed SSP. The median calculated stone volume was significantly smaller among patients with SSP: 25 (14-60) mm3 vs. 113 (66-180) mm3 (p<0.001). After adjusting for covariates, predictors of retained stone included: neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) ≥3.14 (odds ratio [OR] 6, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 3.49-10.33), leukocyte esterase (LE) >75 (OR 4.83, 95% CI 2.12-11.00), and proximal stone (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.16- 3.83). For every 1 mm3 increase in stone volume, the risk of SSP failure increased by 2.5%. The model explained 89.4% (0.864-0.923) of the variability in the outcome. This model was superior to the model including maximal axial diameter (0.881, 0.847-0.909, p=0.04). Conclusions: We present a nomogram incorporating stone volume to better predict SSP. Stone volume estimated using an ellipsoid formula can predict SSP better than maximal axial diameter. © 2021 Canadian Urological Association. All rights reserved.
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.7364
dc.identifier.eid2-s2.0-85118767543
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10938/33071
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherCanadian Urological Association
dc.relation.ispartofCanadian Urological Association Journal
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectEsterase
dc.subjectAdult
dc.subjectArea under the curve
dc.subjectArticle
dc.subjectComorbidity
dc.subjectComputer assisted tomography
dc.subjectConservative treatment
dc.subjectControlled study
dc.subjectData analysis software
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectHuman
dc.subjectIntermethod comparison
dc.subjectLaboratory test
dc.subjectLeukocyte
dc.subjectMajor clinical study
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectMathematical analysis
dc.subjectNeutrophil lymphocyte ratio
dc.subjectNomogram
dc.subjectPrediction
dc.subjectReceiver operating characteristic
dc.subjectRetrospective study
dc.subjectStone volume
dc.subjectTreatment failure
dc.subjectUreter stone
dc.subjectVolumetry
dc.titleDoes volume matter? Incorporating estimated stone volume in a nomogram to predict ureteral stone passage
dc.typeArticle

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
2021-2660.pdf
Size:
272.34 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Collections