Measuring kidney stone volume - practical considerations and current evidence from the EAU endourology section.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Current Opinion in Urology Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-21 DOI:10.1097/MOU.0000000000001271
Nico C Grossmann, Frederic Panthier, Luca Afferi, Panagiotis Kallidonis, Bhaskar K Somani
{"title":"Measuring kidney stone volume - practical considerations and current evidence from the EAU endourology section.","authors":"Nico C Grossmann, Frederic Panthier, Luca Afferi, Panagiotis Kallidonis, Bhaskar K Somani","doi":"10.1097/MOU.0000000000001271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>This narrative review provides an overview of the use, differences, and clinical impact of current methods for kidney stone volume assessment.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The different approaches to volume measurement are based on noncontrast computed tomography (NCCT). While volume measurement using formulas is sufficient for smaller stones, it tends to overestimate volume for larger or irregularly shaped calculi. In contrast, software-based segmentation significantly improves accuracy and reproducibility, and artificial intelligence based volumetry additionally shows excellent agreement with reference standards while reducing observer variability and measurement time. Moreover, specific CT preparation protocols may further enhance image quality and thus improve measurement accuracy. Clinically, stone volume has proven to be a superior predictor of stone-related events during follow-up, spontaneous stone passage under conservative management, and stone-free rates after shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) and ureteroscopy (URS) compared to linear measurements.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Although manual measurement remains practical, its accuracy diminishes for complex or larger stones. Software-based segmentation and volumetry offer higher precision and efficiency but require established standards and broader access to dedicated software for routine clinical use.</p>","PeriodicalId":11093,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Urology","volume":" ","pages":"323-330"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0000000000001271","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: This narrative review provides an overview of the use, differences, and clinical impact of current methods for kidney stone volume assessment.

Recent findings: The different approaches to volume measurement are based on noncontrast computed tomography (NCCT). While volume measurement using formulas is sufficient for smaller stones, it tends to overestimate volume for larger or irregularly shaped calculi. In contrast, software-based segmentation significantly improves accuracy and reproducibility, and artificial intelligence based volumetry additionally shows excellent agreement with reference standards while reducing observer variability and measurement time. Moreover, specific CT preparation protocols may further enhance image quality and thus improve measurement accuracy. Clinically, stone volume has proven to be a superior predictor of stone-related events during follow-up, spontaneous stone passage under conservative management, and stone-free rates after shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) and ureteroscopy (URS) compared to linear measurements.

Summary: Although manual measurement remains practical, its accuracy diminishes for complex or larger stones. Software-based segmentation and volumetry offer higher precision and efficiency but require established standards and broader access to dedicated software for routine clinical use.

测量肾结石体积-实际考虑和当前证据从EAU泌尿科。
综述目的:本文综述了肾结石体积评估的常用方法、差异和临床影响。最近的发现:不同的体积测量方法是基于非对比计算机断层扫描(NCCT)。虽然使用公式测量体积对于较小的结石是足够的,但对于较大或不规则形状的结石,它往往会高估体积。相比之下,基于软件的分割显著提高了准确性和再现性,而基于人工智能的体积法在减少观察者变异和测量时间的同时,也与参考标准表现出了良好的一致性。此外,特定的CT制备方案可以进一步提高图像质量,从而提高测量精度。临床上,与线性测量相比,结石体积已被证明是随访期间结石相关事件、保守治疗下自发结石排出以及冲击波碎石(SWL)和输尿管镜检查(URS)后结石清除率的优越预测指标。虽然人工测量仍然是实用的,但对于复杂或较大的石头,其精度会降低。基于软件的分割和体积测定提供了更高的精度和效率,但需要建立标准,并且需要更广泛地访问常规临床使用的专用软件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Current Opinion in Urology
Current Opinion in Urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
4.00%
发文量
140
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​​Current Opinion in Urology delivers a broad-based perspective on the most recent and most exciting developments in urology from across the world. Published bimonthly and featuring ten key topics – including focuses on prostate cancer, bladder cancer and minimally invasive urology – the journal’s renowned team of guest editors ensure a balanced, expert assessment of the recently published literature in each respective field with insightful editorials and on-the-mark invited reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信