Can infundibular height predict the clearance of lower pole calyceal stone after extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy?

International Braz J Urol

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 140-150

  Arzoz Fabregas, M ^a   Ibarz Servio, L ^a   Blasco Casares, F J ^a   Ramon Dalmau, M ^a   Ruiz Marcellan, F J ^a  

^a INSTITUT UNIVERSITARI DEXEUS   (Spain)

Author keywords

Anatomy; Kidney; Kidney calculi; Kidney calices; Lithotripsy

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; FEMALE; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; KIDNEY CALYX; LITHOTRIPSY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEPHROLITHIASIS; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; STANDARD; STATISTICAL MODEL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

FEMALE; HUMANS; KIDNEY CALCULI; KIDNEY CALICES; LITHOTRIPSY; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROC CURVE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 76249129147     PISSN: 16775538     EISSN: 16776119     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/S1677-55382009000200003     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Sampaio FJ, D'Anunciacao AL, Silva EC: Comparative follow-up of patients with acute and obtuse infundibulum-pelvic angle submitted to extracorporeal Shockwave lithotripsy for lower caliceal stones: preliminary report and proposed study design. J Endourol. 1997; 11: 157-61.
2. Knoll T, Musial A, Trojan L, Ptashnyk T, Michel MS, Alken P, et al.: Measurement of renal anatomy for prediction of lower-pole caliceal stone clearance: reproducibiliry of different parameters. J Endourol. 2003; 17:447-51.
3. Eisenberger F, Bub P, Schmidt A: The fate of residual fragments after extra-corporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Endourol 1992; 6: 217-8.
4. Politis G, Griffith DP: ESWL: stone-free efficacy based upon stone size and location. World J Urol 1987; 5: 255-8.
5. Albala DM, Assimos DG, dayman RV, Denstedt JD, Grasso M, Gutierrez-Aceves J, et al.: Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis-initial results. J Urol. 2001; 166: 2072-80. Erratum in: J Urol 2002; 167: 1805.
6. Sumino Y, Mimata H, Tasaki Y, Ohno H, Hoshino T, Nomura T, et al.: Predictors of lower pole renal stone clearance after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol. 2002; 168: 1344-7.
7. Ghoneim IA, Ziada AM, Elkatib SE: Predictive factors of lower calyceal stone clearance after Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy (ESWL): a focus on the infundibulopelvic anatomy. Eur Urol. 2005; 48: 296-302; discussion 302.
8. Danuser H, Mtiller R, Descoeudres B, Dobry E, Studer UE: Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of lower calyx calculi: how much is treatment outcome influenced by the anatomy of the collecting system? Eur Urol. 2007; 52: 539-46.
9. Elbahnasy AM, Shalhav AL, Hoenig DM, Elashry OM, Smith DS, McDougall EM, et al.: Lower caliceal stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy: the impact of lower pole radio graphic anatomy. J Urol. 1998; 159: 676-82.
10. Keeley FX Jr, Moussa SA, Smith G, Tolley DA: Clearance of lower-pole stones following shockwave lithotripsy: effect of the infundibulopelvic angle. Eur Urol. 1999; 36: 371-5.
11. Poulakis V, Dahm P, Witzsch U, de Vries R, Remplik J, Becht E: Prediction of lower pole stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy using an artificial neural network. J Urol. 2003; 169: 1250-6.
12. Desai MR, Raghunath SK, Manohar T, Prajay S: Lower-caliceal stone clearance index to predict clearance of stone after SWL. J Endourol. 2006; 20: 248-51.
13. Symes A, Shaw G, Cony D, Choong S: Pelvi-calyceal height, a predictor of success when treating lower pole stones with extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. Urol Res. 2005; 33: 297-300.
14. Sorensen CM, Chandhoke PS: Is lower pole caliceal anatomy predictive of extracorporeal shockwave lith otripsy success for primary lower pole kidney stones? J Urol. 2002; 168: 2377-82; discussion 2382.
15. Tuckey J, Devasia A, Murthy L, Ramsden P, Thomas D: Is there a simpler method for predicting lower pole stone clearance after shockwave lithotripsy than measuring infundibulopelvic angle? J Endourol. 2000; 14: 475-8.
16. Tiselius HG, Andersson A: Stone burden in an average Swedish population of stone formers requiring active stone removal: how can the stone size be estimated in the clinical routine? Eur Urol. 2003; 43: 275-81.
17. Grasso M, Ficazzola M: Retrograde ureteropyeloscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi. J Urol. 1999; 162: 1904-8.
18. Pearle MS, Lingeman JE, Leveillee R, Kuo R, Pretninger GM, Nadler RB, et al.: Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol. 2005; 173:2005-9.
19. Sampaio FJ, Aragao AH: Inferior pole collecting system anatomy: its probable role in extracorporeal Shockwave lithotripsy. J Urol. 1992; 147: 322-4.
20. Gallagher HJ, Tolley DA: 2000 AD: still a role for the intravenous urogram in stone management? Curr Opin Urol. 2000; 10:551-5.
21. Pace KT, Weir MJ, Harju M, Tariq N, D'A Honey RJ: Individual patient variation and inter-rater reliability of lower calyceal infundibular width on routine intra venous pyelography BJU Int. 2003; 92: 607-9.
22. Filho DR, Favorito LA, Sampaio FJ: Inferior collecting system anatomy: comparative study between intrave nous urogram and three dimensional helical computarizad tomography. J Urol. 2007; 177: (#431).