The Cumulated Stone Diameter: A Limited Tool for Stone Burden Estimation

• Published in: Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.) N.J.), 2015-09, Vol.86 (3), p.477-481
• Main Authors: Merigot de Treigny, Olivier, Bou Nasr, Elie, Almont, Thierry, Tack, Ivan, Rischmann, Pascal, Soulié, Michel, Huyghe, Eric
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Female; Humans; Kidney Calculi - pathology; Kidney Calculi - surgery; Male; Mathematical Computing; Middle Aged; Patient Selection; Predictive Value of Tests; Prospective Studies; ROC Curve; Severity of Illness Index; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Urology
• ISSN: 0090-4295; 1527-9995
• DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.06.018

Objective To compare the performance of the main methods used to estimate stone burden in order to improve and standardize preoperative evaluation of stone disease. Methods From January 2012 to June 2013, a series of consecutive retrograde intrarenal stone surgery was prospectively evaluated at a single institute. All patients had a pre- and postoperative CT scan. The stone burden was estimated using 3 methods: the cumulative stone diameter (M1), Ackermann's formula (M2), and the sphere formula (M3). The predictive value of the postoperative stone-free status of these methods was then compared. Results Overall (n = 142), the stone-free rate was 64%. The three methods (M1, M2, and M3) were all predictive of stone-free status for stones 20 mm ( P  = .0024 and .023). Using receiver operating characteristic curves, we found that areas under the curve were 0.73, 0.70, and 0.71 for stones below 20 mm and 0.53, 0.74, and 0.74 for stones above 20 mm for M1, M2, and M3, respectively. In multivariate analysis, M1 and M3 were both found to be independently associated with the stone-free status in the whole series ( P