Is there any predictive value of the ratio of the upper to the lower diameter of the ureter for ureteral stone impaction?
Diameter
Impaction
Ratio
Ureteral stone
Journal
Current urology
ISSN: 1661-7649
Titre abrégé: Curr Urol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101471188
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2021
Sep 2021
Historique:
received:
21
12
2019
accepted:
26
02
2020
entrez:
23
9
2021
pubmed:
24
9
2021
medline:
24
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We aimed to determine if the ratio of the upper to the lower diameter of the ureter could have any predictive value for ureteral stone impaction. Patients who had a solitary unilateral ureteric stone, determined by noncontrast computerized tomography, were assessed if they had undergone ureteroscopic lithotripsy. A total of 111 patients, 84 males (76%), and 27 females (24%), were recruited to the study. Demographic data of the patients and preoperative radiological parameters based on noncontrast computerized tomography were recorded. The impaction status was also assessed during the operation. Of the 111 patients, ureteral stones in 63 (57%) patients were determined to be impacted, and ureteral stones in 48 (43%) were nonimpacted. Impacted stones were more common in older patients, female patients, and patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 2. Significant relationships were found between the impaction status and transverse stone length, longest stone length, upper diameter of the ureter, ratio (upper diameter of the ureter/lower diameter of the ureter), and anteroposterior diameter of the pelvis. These parameters were higher in patients with impacted stones.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
We aimed to determine if the ratio of the upper to the lower diameter of the ureter could have any predictive value for ureteral stone impaction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
Patients who had a solitary unilateral ureteric stone, determined by noncontrast computerized tomography, were assessed if they had undergone ureteroscopic lithotripsy. A total of 111 patients, 84 males (76%), and 27 females (24%), were recruited to the study. Demographic data of the patients and preoperative radiological parameters based on noncontrast computerized tomography were recorded. The impaction status was also assessed during the operation.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of the 111 patients, ureteral stones in 63 (57%) patients were determined to be impacted, and ureteral stones in 48 (43%) were nonimpacted. Impacted stones were more common in older patients, female patients, and patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 2.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Significant relationships were found between the impaction status and transverse stone length, longest stone length, upper diameter of the ureter, ratio (upper diameter of the ureter/lower diameter of the ureter), and anteroposterior diameter of the pelvis. These parameters were higher in patients with impacted stones.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34552456
doi: 10.1097/CU9.0000000000000019
pii: Curr-Urol-21-0067
pmc: PMC8451323
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
161-166Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
No conflict of interest has been declared by the author.
Références
Urology. 2014 Feb;83(2):288-92
pubmed: 24275282
Int Urol Nephrol. 2014 Oct;46(10):1895-901
pubmed: 24824146
Eur Urol. 2007 Dec;52(6):1751-7
pubmed: 17459573
Urology. 2014 Jul;84(1):16-21
pubmed: 24685060
J Endourol. 2008 Nov;22(11):2507-11
pubmed: 19046090
J Urol. 2004 Jan;171(1):89-91
pubmed: 14665851
Int J Urol. 2013 Jun;20(6):616-21
pubmed: 23163835
Chirurgia (Bucur). 2014 May-Jun;109(3):369-74
pubmed: 24956343
Urolithiasis. 2016 Aug;44(4):371-6
pubmed: 26662172
J Urol. 2014 Mar;191(3):673-7
pubmed: 24060643
World J Urol. 2017 Oct;35(10):1497-1506
pubmed: 28321499
Urolithiasis. 2015 Jun;43(3):271-5
pubmed: 25820291
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004 Apr;182(4):1039-41
pubmed: 15039184
J Endourol. 2010 Oct;24(10):1681-5
pubmed: 20677988
Investig Clin Urol. 2017 Sep;58(5):339-345
pubmed: 28868505
J Endourol. 2009 Feb;23(2):243-7
pubmed: 19220083
J Urol. 1990 Feb;143(2):263-6
pubmed: 1967657
J Endourol. 2018 Apr;32(4):309-314
pubmed: 29325445
Int J Urol. 2017 Apr;24(4):326-329
pubmed: 28295676
J Urol. 2009 Mar;181(3):1158-62
pubmed: 19152940
Urology. 2017 Aug;106:45-49
pubmed: 28499762