F. Panthier , S. Kutchukian , H. Ducousso , S. Doizi , C. Solano , L. Candela , M. Corrales , M. Chicaud , O. Traxer , S. Hautekeete , T. Tailly
{"title":"如何计算碎石量及其手术应用?","authors":"F. Panthier , S. Kutchukian , H. Ducousso , S. Doizi , C. Solano , L. Candela , M. Corrales , M. Chicaud , O. Traxer , S. Hautekeete , T. Tailly","doi":"10.1016/j.acuro.2023.07.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Current interventional guidelines refer to the cumulative stone diameter to choose the appropriate surgical modality (ureteroscopy (URS), extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL)). The stone volume (SV) has been introduced recently, to better estimate the stone burden. This review aimed to summarize the available methods to evaluate the SV and its use in urolithiasis treatment.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>A comprehensive review of the literature was performed in December 2022 by searching Embase, Cochrane and Pubmed databases. Articles were considered eligible if they described SV measurement or the stone free rate after different treatment modalities (SWL, URS, PCNL) or spontaneous passage, based on SV measurement. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility and the quality of the articles and performed the data extraction.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In total, 28 studies were included. All studies used different measurement techniques for stone volume. The automated volume measurement appeared to be more precise than the calculated volume. In vitro studies showed that the automated volume measurement was closer to actual stone volume, with a lower inter-observer variability. Regarding URS, stone volume was found to be more predictive of stone free rates as compared to maximum stone diameter or cumulative diameter for stones >20<!--> <!-->mm. This was not the case for PCNL and SWL.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Stone volume estimation is feasible, manually or automatically and is likely a better representation of the actual stone burden. While for larger stones treated by retrograde intrarenal surgery, stone volume appears to be a better predictor of SFR, the superiority of stone volume throughout all stone burdens and for all stone treatments, remains to be proven. Automated volume acquisition is more precise and reproducible than calculated volume.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7145,"journal":{"name":"Actas urologicas espanolas","volume":"48 1","pages":"Pages 71-78"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"¿Cómo calcular el volumen litiásico y cuál es su aplicación quirúrgica?\",\"authors\":\"F. Panthier , S. Kutchukian , H. Ducousso , S. Doizi , C. Solano , L. Candela , M. Corrales , M. Chicaud , O. Traxer , S. Hautekeete , T. Tailly\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.acuro.2023.07.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Current interventional guidelines refer to the cumulative stone diameter to choose the appropriate surgical modality (ureteroscopy (URS), extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL)). The stone volume (SV) has been introduced recently, to better estimate the stone burden. This review aimed to summarize the available methods to evaluate the SV and its use in urolithiasis treatment.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>A comprehensive review of the literature was performed in December 2022 by searching Embase, Cochrane and Pubmed databases. Articles were considered eligible if they described SV measurement or the stone free rate after different treatment modalities (SWL, URS, PCNL) or spontaneous passage, based on SV measurement. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility and the quality of the articles and performed the data extraction.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In total, 28 studies were included. All studies used different measurement techniques for stone volume. The automated volume measurement appeared to be more precise than the calculated volume. In vitro studies showed that the automated volume measurement was closer to actual stone volume, with a lower inter-observer variability. Regarding URS, stone volume was found to be more predictive of stone free rates as compared to maximum stone diameter or cumulative diameter for stones >20<!--> <!-->mm. This was not the case for PCNL and SWL.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Stone volume estimation is feasible, manually or automatically and is likely a better representation of the actual stone burden. While for larger stones treated by retrograde intrarenal surgery, stone volume appears to be a better predictor of SFR, the superiority of stone volume throughout all stone burdens and for all stone treatments, remains to be proven. Automated volume acquisition is more precise and reproducible than calculated volume.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7145,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Actas urologicas espanolas\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"Pages 71-78\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Actas urologicas espanolas\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0210480623001237\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Actas urologicas espanolas","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0210480623001237","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
¿Cómo calcular el volumen litiásico y cuál es su aplicación quirúrgica?
Objective
Current interventional guidelines refer to the cumulative stone diameter to choose the appropriate surgical modality (ureteroscopy (URS), extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL)). The stone volume (SV) has been introduced recently, to better estimate the stone burden. This review aimed to summarize the available methods to evaluate the SV and its use in urolithiasis treatment.
Material and methods
A comprehensive review of the literature was performed in December 2022 by searching Embase, Cochrane and Pubmed databases. Articles were considered eligible if they described SV measurement or the stone free rate after different treatment modalities (SWL, URS, PCNL) or spontaneous passage, based on SV measurement. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility and the quality of the articles and performed the data extraction.
Results
In total, 28 studies were included. All studies used different measurement techniques for stone volume. The automated volume measurement appeared to be more precise than the calculated volume. In vitro studies showed that the automated volume measurement was closer to actual stone volume, with a lower inter-observer variability. Regarding URS, stone volume was found to be more predictive of stone free rates as compared to maximum stone diameter or cumulative diameter for stones >20 mm. This was not the case for PCNL and SWL.
Conclusions
Stone volume estimation is feasible, manually or automatically and is likely a better representation of the actual stone burden. While for larger stones treated by retrograde intrarenal surgery, stone volume appears to be a better predictor of SFR, the superiority of stone volume throughout all stone burdens and for all stone treatments, remains to be proven. Automated volume acquisition is more precise and reproducible than calculated volume.
期刊介绍:
Actas Urológicas Españolas is an international journal dedicated to urological diseases and renal transplant. It has been the official publication of the Spanish Urology Association since 1974 and of the American Urology Confederation since 2008. Its articles cover all aspects related to urology.
Actas Urológicas Españolas, governed by the peer review system (double blinded), is published online in Spanish and English. Consequently, manuscripts may be sent in Spanish or English and bidirectional free cost translation will be provided.