Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Rearrangement of the Guy's stone score improves prediction of stone-free rate after percutaneous nephrolithotomy.
Moreno-Palacios, Jorge; Avilés-Ibarra, Oswaldo José; García-Peña, Enrique; Torres-Anguiano, Juan Ramón; Serrano-Brambilia, Eduardo Alonso; López-Sámano, Virgilio Augusto; Maldonado-Alcaraz, Efraín.
Afiliação
  • Moreno-Palacios J; Department of Urology, Hospital de Especialidades, Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • Avilés-Ibarra OJ; Department of Urology, Hospital de Especialidades, Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • García-Peña E; Department of Urology, Hospital de Especialidades, Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • Torres-Anguiano JR; Department of Urology, Hospital de Especialidades, Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • Serrano-Brambilia EA; Department of Urology, Hospital de Especialidades, Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • López-Sámano VA; Department of Urology, Hospital de Especialidades, Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI, Mexico City, Mexico.
  • Maldonado-Alcaraz E; Department of Urology, Hospital de Especialidades, Centro Médico Nacional Siglo XXI, Mexico City, Mexico.
Turk J Urol ; 44(1): 36-41, 2018 Jan.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29484225
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

We propose a modification of the original Guy's Stone Score (GSS) to hold on 20 % of prognostic discrimination among groups which makes this score a more reliable resource for risk assessment in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). MATERIAL AND

METHODS:

Historical cohort of 126 patients undergoing PCNL from December 2010 to November 2014 was included in the survey. Every patient was classified according to the original GSS. For the new classification of Guy Stone Score (GSS-M) all of the subgroups included in the scale were analyzed individually and then ranked from better to worst according to the postoperative stone- free rates (SFRs). This ranking led us to reclassify all the original subgroups, clustering them in three new categories according to their SFRs as subgroups of good, intermediate and poor prognosis, trying to achieve at least 20% of prognostic discrimination among the groups.

RESULTS:

Hundred and twenty-six PCNL procedures were evaluated, but only 124 were included for statistical analysis and classified based on SFR according to the GSS as follows 76% for grade 1, 71% for grade 2, 55% for grade 3 and 20% for grade 4. The SFRs were also assessed for the GSS-M obtaining the following predictive values as 93%, 67% and 44% for the good, intermediate and poor prognostic groups, respectively. The prognostic difference among the GSS-M groups was always >20% (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION:

The original GSS has limitations to predict SFR because of its poor discrimination power among prognostic groups. This rearrangement improves prediction of SFR and better discriminates risk groups in PCNL.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article