改良的首尔国立大学肾结石复杂性评分系统用于体外冲击波碎石后预测无结石状态。

IF 2.7 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Research and Reports in Urology Pub Date : 2025-08-08 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/RRU.S534829
Tipatai Yodplob, Chinnakhet Ketsuwan
{"title":"改良的首尔国立大学肾结石复杂性评分系统用于体外冲击波碎石后预测无结石状态。","authors":"Tipatai Yodplob, Chinnakhet Ketsuwan","doi":"10.2147/RRU.S534829","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Incorporating the modified Seoul National University Renal Stone Complexity (S-ReSC-R) scoring system into the preoperative evaluation of both retrograde intrarenal surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotomy has proven to be highly effective in predicting stone-free status after each procedure.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to validate the S-ReSC-R scoring system in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and compare it with the Triple D score under the same protocol.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Data on consecutive patients undergoing ESWL at a tertiary referral center between 2019 and 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 297 patients who were evaluated with non-contrast CT prior to the procedure and had adequate follow-up data were included in the analysis. The S-ReSC-R score was calculated based on the number of sites affected. Stone-free status was defined as no evidence of residual stones. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to determine cutoff values for both scoring systems.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall stone-free rate (SFRs) after a single session was 60.5%. The average S-ReSC-R score was significantly lower in patients who had successful ESWL than in those with failed ESWL (1.50 vs 2.63, <i>p</i> < 0.001). The SFRs were significantly lower with higher S-ReSC-R scores: 72.4% in the low score (1-2) group, 36.0% in the intermediate score (3-4) group, and 10.5% in the high score (5-12) group (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Multivariate analyses revealed that both the S-ReSC-R score and the Triple D score independently influenced ESWL success (both <i>p</i> < 0.001). The area under the ROC curve for the S-ReSC-R score was 0.767, whereas that for the Triple D score was 0.694.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study confirms that the S-ReSC-R is a reliable tool for predicting stone-free status after ESWL. Thus, its use in evaluating patients for ESWL is recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":21008,"journal":{"name":"Research and Reports in Urology","volume":"17 ","pages":"279-286"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12341796/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modified Seoul National University Renal Stone Complexity Scoring System for Predicting Stone-Free Status After Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy.\",\"authors\":\"Tipatai Yodplob, Chinnakhet Ketsuwan\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/RRU.S534829\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Incorporating the modified Seoul National University Renal Stone Complexity (S-ReSC-R) scoring system into the preoperative evaluation of both retrograde intrarenal surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotomy has proven to be highly effective in predicting stone-free status after each procedure.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to validate the S-ReSC-R scoring system in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and compare it with the Triple D score under the same protocol.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Data on consecutive patients undergoing ESWL at a tertiary referral center between 2019 and 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 297 patients who were evaluated with non-contrast CT prior to the procedure and had adequate follow-up data were included in the analysis. The S-ReSC-R score was calculated based on the number of sites affected. Stone-free status was defined as no evidence of residual stones. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to determine cutoff values for both scoring systems.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall stone-free rate (SFRs) after a single session was 60.5%. The average S-ReSC-R score was significantly lower in patients who had successful ESWL than in those with failed ESWL (1.50 vs 2.63, <i>p</i> < 0.001). The SFRs were significantly lower with higher S-ReSC-R scores: 72.4% in the low score (1-2) group, 36.0% in the intermediate score (3-4) group, and 10.5% in the high score (5-12) group (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Multivariate analyses revealed that both the S-ReSC-R score and the Triple D score independently influenced ESWL success (both <i>p</i> < 0.001). The area under the ROC curve for the S-ReSC-R score was 0.767, whereas that for the Triple D score was 0.694.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study confirms that the S-ReSC-R is a reliable tool for predicting stone-free status after ESWL. Thus, its use in evaluating patients for ESWL is recommended.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21008,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research and Reports in Urology\",\"volume\":\"17 \",\"pages\":\"279-286\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12341796/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research and Reports in Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S534829\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research and Reports in Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S534829","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:将改良的首尔国立大学肾结石复杂性(S-ReSC-R)评分系统纳入逆行肾内手术和经皮肾镜取石术的术前评估,已被证明在预测每次手术后结石无结石状态方面非常有效。目的:验证体外冲击波碎石术(ESWL)中S-ReSC-R评分系统的有效性,并与相同方案下的Triple D评分进行比较。材料和方法:回顾性分析2019年至2021年在三级转诊中心连续接受ESWL的患者的数据。共有297例患者在手术前进行了非对比CT评估,并有足够的随访数据,这些患者被纳入分析。S-ReSC-R评分是根据受影响部位的数量计算的。无石状态被定义为没有残留石的证据。生成受试者操作特征(ROC)曲线,以确定两种评分系统的截止值。结果:单次治疗后总结石清除率(SFRs)为60.5%。ESWL成功患者的平均S-ReSC-R评分显著低于ESWL失败患者(1.50 vs 2.63, p < 0.001)。S-ReSC-R评分越高,SFRs越低:低评分(1-2)组为72.4%,中评分(3-4)组为36.0%,高评分(5-12)组为10.5% (p < 0.001)。多变量分析显示,S-ReSC-R评分和Triple D评分独立影响ESWL成功(p均< 0.001)。S-ReSC-R评分的ROC曲线下面积为0.767,而Triple D评分的ROC曲线下面积为0.694。结论:本研究证实S-ReSC-R是预测ESWL术后无结石状态的可靠工具。因此,推荐将其用于评估ESWL患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Modified Seoul National University Renal Stone Complexity Scoring System for Predicting Stone-Free Status After Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy.

Background: Incorporating the modified Seoul National University Renal Stone Complexity (S-ReSC-R) scoring system into the preoperative evaluation of both retrograde intrarenal surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotomy has proven to be highly effective in predicting stone-free status after each procedure.

Objective: This study aimed to validate the S-ReSC-R scoring system in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and compare it with the Triple D score under the same protocol.

Materials and methods: Data on consecutive patients undergoing ESWL at a tertiary referral center between 2019 and 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 297 patients who were evaluated with non-contrast CT prior to the procedure and had adequate follow-up data were included in the analysis. The S-ReSC-R score was calculated based on the number of sites affected. Stone-free status was defined as no evidence of residual stones. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to determine cutoff values for both scoring systems.

Results: The overall stone-free rate (SFRs) after a single session was 60.5%. The average S-ReSC-R score was significantly lower in patients who had successful ESWL than in those with failed ESWL (1.50 vs 2.63, p < 0.001). The SFRs were significantly lower with higher S-ReSC-R scores: 72.4% in the low score (1-2) group, 36.0% in the intermediate score (3-4) group, and 10.5% in the high score (5-12) group (p < 0.001). Multivariate analyses revealed that both the S-ReSC-R score and the Triple D score independently influenced ESWL success (both p < 0.001). The area under the ROC curve for the S-ReSC-R score was 0.767, whereas that for the Triple D score was 0.694.

Conclusion: This study confirms that the S-ReSC-R is a reliable tool for predicting stone-free status after ESWL. Thus, its use in evaluating patients for ESWL is recommended.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Research and Reports in Urology
Research and Reports in Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
60
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Research and Reports in Urology is an international, peer-reviewed, open access, online journal. Publishing original research, reports, editorials, reviews and commentaries on all aspects of adult and pediatric urology in the clinic and laboratory including the following topics: Pathology, pathophysiology of urological disease Investigation and treatment of urological disease Pharmacology of drugs used for the treatment of urological disease Although the main focus of the journal is to publish research and clinical results in humans; preclinical, animal and in vitro studies will be published where they will shed light on disease processes and potential new therapies. Issues of patient safety and quality of care will also be considered.
×
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