{"title":"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。","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":"{\"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}","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}
Validation of the STONE and new STONE score for ureteral stones in elderly patients: a retrospective cohort study.
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.
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.