Validation of the STONE and new STONE score for ureteral stones in elderly patients: a retrospective cohort study.

IF 2.2 2区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
İbrahim Altundağ, Mehmet Taylan Koçer
{"title":"Validation of the STONE and new STONE score for ureteral stones in elderly patients: a retrospective cohort study.","authors":"İbrahim Altundağ, Mehmet Taylan Koçer","doi":"10.1007/s00240-025-01843-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Ureteral stones are a common cause of emergency department visits. However, their presentation in older adults may be atypical. As the global population ages, effective and low-risk diagnostic strategies are increasingly vital to improve patient outcomes, reduce radiation exposure, and lower healthcare costs. This retrospective cohort study conducted between January 2020 and December 2024. We aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of the STONE and New STONE scores in detecting ureteral stones among patients aged 60 and older presenting with flank pain. A total of 161 patients who underwent abdominal computed tomography (CT) were included, with ureteral stones detected in 48.4%. Patients with stones had significantly higher STONE (8.7 ± 2.0 vs. 6.1 ± 1.9) and New STONE scores (5.0 ± 1.9 vs. 2.7 ± 1.6) compared to patients without stone (p < 0.001 for both). The STONE score showed an AUC of 0.830 and the New STONE score 0.829. A cut-off STONE score > 5 yielded 97.4% sensitivity, while a cut-off > 9 provided 88.0% specificity. For the New STONE score, a cut-off > 3 offered 89.7% sensitivity, and a cut-off > 6 showed 97.6% specificity. Both scores demonstrated reliable diagnostic accuracy in elderly patients. The STONE score favored sensitivity, while the New STONE score favored specificity. Our findings suggest that these scoring systems may support imaging decision-making and contribute to reducing unnecessary CT exposure and healthcare costs in older adults with suspected ureteral stones.</p>","PeriodicalId":23411,"journal":{"name":"Urolithiasis","volume":"53 1","pages":"167"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urolithiasis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-025-01843-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ureteral stones are a common cause of emergency department visits. However, their presentation in older adults may be atypical. As the global population ages, effective and low-risk diagnostic strategies are increasingly vital to improve patient outcomes, reduce radiation exposure, and lower healthcare costs. This retrospective cohort study conducted between January 2020 and December 2024. We aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of the STONE and New STONE scores in detecting ureteral stones among patients aged 60 and older presenting with flank pain. A total of 161 patients who underwent abdominal computed tomography (CT) were included, with ureteral stones detected in 48.4%. Patients with stones had significantly higher STONE (8.7 ± 2.0 vs. 6.1 ± 1.9) and New STONE scores (5.0 ± 1.9 vs. 2.7 ± 1.6) compared to patients without stone (p < 0.001 for both). The STONE score showed an AUC of 0.830 and the New STONE score 0.829. A cut-off STONE score > 5 yielded 97.4% sensitivity, while a cut-off > 9 provided 88.0% specificity. For the New STONE score, a cut-off > 3 offered 89.7% sensitivity, and a cut-off > 6 showed 97.6% specificity. Both scores demonstrated reliable diagnostic accuracy in elderly patients. The STONE score favored sensitivity, while the New STONE score favored specificity. Our findings suggest that these scoring systems may support imaging decision-making and contribute to reducing unnecessary CT exposure and healthcare costs in older adults with suspected ureteral stones.

老年患者输尿管结石的STONE和新STONE评分的验证:一项回顾性队列研究。
输尿管结石是急诊就诊的常见原因。然而,其在老年人中的表现可能是非典型的。随着全球人口老龄化,有效和低风险的诊断策略对于改善患者预后、减少辐射暴露和降低医疗保健成本变得越来越重要。这项回顾性队列研究于2020年1月至2024年12月进行。我们的目的是评估STONE和New STONE评分在60岁及以上伴有侧腹疼痛的患者中检测输尿管结石的诊断性能。共有161例患者接受了腹部计算机断层扫描(CT),其中48.4%的患者发现输尿管结石。与无结石患者相比,结石患者的STONE评分(8.7±2.0比6.1±1.9)和New STONE评分(5.0±1.9比2.7±1.6)明显更高(p = 5敏感性为97.4%,而截断>.9的特异性为88.0%)。对于New STONE评分,截止> 3的敏感性为89.7%,截止> 6的特异性为97.6%。两种评分都显示了对老年患者可靠的诊断准确性。STONE评分偏向敏感性,而New STONE评分偏向特异性。我们的研究结果表明,这些评分系统可以支持成像决策,有助于减少怀疑输尿管结石的老年人不必要的CT暴露和医疗费用。
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
Urolithiasis
Urolithiasis UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
6.50%
发文量
74
期刊介绍: Official Journal of the International Urolithiasis Society The journal aims to publish original articles in the fields of clinical and experimental investigation only within the sphere of urolithiasis and its related areas of research. The journal covers all aspects of urolithiasis research including the diagnosis, epidemiology, pathogenesis, genetics, clinical biochemistry, open and non-invasive surgical intervention, nephrological investigation, chemistry and prophylaxis of the disorder. The Editor welcomes contributions on topics of interest to urologists, nephrologists, radiologists, clinical biochemists, epidemiologists, nutritionists, basic scientists and nurses working in that field. Contributions may be submitted as full-length articles or as rapid communications in the form of Letters to the Editor. Articles should be original and should contain important new findings from carefully conducted studies designed to produce statistically significant data. Please note that we no longer publish articles classified as Case Reports. Editorials and review articles may be published by invitation from the Editorial Board. All submissions are peer-reviewed. Through an electronic system for the submission and review of manuscripts, the Editor and Associate Editors aim to make publication accessible as quickly as possible to a large number of readers throughout the world.
×
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