Composition analysis of renal and ureteral calculi in a single center in northern China in the past decade.

The current report aimed to evaluate the characteristics of stone composition in 3637 renal and ureteral calculi patients in a single center while clarifying its relationship with sex, age, and time. Out of 3637 cases of upper urinary tract stones, stone specimens were analyzed retrospectively. There were 2373 male patients aged 6 months-87 years, with an average age of 44.73 ±â€…15.63 years, and 1264 female patients aged 4 months-87 years, with an average age of 46.84 ±â€…16.00 years. The male-female ratio was 1.88:1. Five hundred twelve patients had ureteral calculi, and 3125 had renal calculi. The SPSS software helped analyze the relationship between renal and ureteral calculi composition and sex, age, and time. Stone composition demonstrated 2205 cases of calcium oxalate stones (60.6%), 518 carbonate apatite (14.2%), 386 uric acids (10.6%), 232 magnesium ammonium phosphate (6.4%), 117 calcium phosphate (3.2%), 76 cystine (2.1%), 47 sodium urate (1.3%), 31 others (0.9%), and 25 ammonium urate (0.7%) cases. The overall male-to-female sex ratio was 1.88:1. Stones in the upper urinary tract were significantly more frequent in men than in women between the ages of 31 and 60. However, such stones were significantly more frequent in women than men over 80 (P < .05). Cystine, Sodium urate, Carbonated apatite, and uric acid indicated significant differences between different age categories (all P < .001). Stone composition analyses revealed that the frequency of calcium oxalate calculi has increased annually, while cystine and carbonated apatite incidences have dropped annually over the past decade. The components of renal and ureteral calculi vary significantly based on age and sex, with calcium oxalate calculi being more frequent in men while magnesium ammonium phosphate stones are more frequent in female patients. The age between 31 and 60 years is the most prevalent for renal and ureteral calculi in men and women.

Impact of COVID-19 on the management and outcomes of ureteric stones in the UK: a multicentre retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if management of ureteric stones in the UK changed during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and whether this affected patient outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a multicentre retrospective study of adults with computed tomography-confirmed ureteric stone disease at 39 UK hospitals during a pre-pandemic period (23/3/2019-22/6/2019) and a period during the pandemic (the 3-month period after the first severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 case at individual sites). The primary outcome was success of primary treatment modality, defined as no further treatment required for the index ureteric stone. Our study protocol was published prior to data collection. RESULTS: A total of 3735 patients were included (pre-pandemic 1956 patients; pandemic 1779 patients). Stone size was similar between groups (P > 0.05). During the pandemic, patients had lower hospital admission rates (pre-pandemic 54.0% vs pandemic 46.5%, P < 0.001), shorter mean length of stay (4.1 vs 3.3 days, P = 0.02), and higher rates of use of medical expulsive therapy (17.4% vs 25.4%, P < 0.001). In patients who received interventional management (pre-pandemic 787 vs pandemic 685), rates of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (22.7% vs 34.1%, P < 0.001) and nephrostomy were higher (7.1% vs 10.5%, P = 0.03); and rates of ureteroscopy (57.2% vs 47.5%, P < 0.001), stent insertion (68.4% vs 54.6%, P < 0.001), and general anaesthetic (92.2% vs 76.2%, P < 0.001) were lower. There was no difference in success of primary treatment modality between patient cohorts (pre-pandemic 73.8% vs pandemic 76.1%, P = 0.11), nor when patients were stratified by treatment modality or stone size. Rates of operative complications, 30-day mortality, and re-admission and renal function at 6 months did not differ between the data collection periods. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there were lower admission rates and fewer invasive procedures performed. Despite this, there were no differences in treatment success or outcomes. Our findings indicate that clinicians can safely adopt management strategies developed during the pandemic to treat more patients conservatively and in the community.

Removal of Small, Asymptomatic Kidney Stones and Incidence of Relapse.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of removing small (≤6 mm), asymptomatic kidney stones endoscopically is unknown. Current guidelines leave such decisions to the urologist and the patient. A prospective study involving older, nonendoscopic technology and some retrospective studies favor observation. However, published data indicate that about half of small renal stones left in place at the time that larger stones were removed caused other symptomatic events within 5 years after surgery. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial in which, during the endoscopic removal of ureteral or contralateral kidney stones, remaining small, asymptomatic stones were removed in 38 patients (treatment group) and were not removed in 35 patients (control group). The primary outcome was relapse as measured by future emergency department visits, surgeries, or growth of secondary stones. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 4.2 years, the treatment group had a longer time to relapse than the control group (P<0.001 by log-rank test). The restricted mean (±SE) time to relapse was 75% longer in the treatment group than in the control group (1631.6±72.8 days vs. 934.2±121.8 days). The risk of relapse was 82% lower in the treatment group than the control group (hazard ratio, 0.18; 95% confidence interval, 0.07 to 0.44), with 16% of patients in the treatment group having a relapse as compared with 63% of those in the control group. Treatment added a median of 25.6 minutes (interquartile range, 18.5 to 35.2) to the surgery time. Five patients in the treatment group and four in the control group had emergency department visits within 2 weeks after surgery. Eight patients in the treatment group and 10 in the control group reported passing kidney stones. CONCLUSIONS: The removal of small, asymptomatic kidney stones during surgery to remove ureteral or contralateral kidney stones resulted in a lower incidence of relapse than nonremoval and in a similar number of emergency department visits related to the surgery. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and the Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02210650.).

Risk factors and predictive model for incidence of difficult ureter during retrograde ureteroscopic lithotripsy.

OBJECTIVE: Difficult ureter can be a challenge for accessing upper urinary tract during lithotripsy. In this study, we evaluated the risk factors for the incidence of difficult ureter in retrograde ureteroscopic lithotripsy. Moreover, we aimed to develop a predictive model for the incidence of difficult ureter. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed consecutive retrograde ureteroscopic lithotripsies performed at our institution between 2009 and 2021. A total of 1010 renal units were evaluated: 449 units with renal stones only and 561 units with ureteral stones, with or without renal stones. RESULTS: The overall incidence of difficult ureter was 5.9%, with a higher incidence in the renal alone stone group than in the ureteral stone group (7.8% vs 4.5%, P = 0.026). Multivariate regression analysis revealed three risk factors for the incidence of difficult ureter: absence of stone history (odds ratio 5.67, 95% confidence interval 2.40-13.4, and P < 0.001), age ≤45 years (odds ratio 3.61, 95% confidence interval 2.05-6.37, and P < 0.001), and renal stone only (odds ratio 2.11, 95% confidence interval 1.22-3.64, and P = 0.008). A simple model using these three risks enabled the stratification of the incidence rate of difficult ureter, with the incidence of high-risk cases being 12.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The greatest risk factor for the incidence of difficult ureter was the absence of stone history, followed by age 45 years or younger, and having only renal stones. In high-risk cases of difficult ureter, the possibility of secondary lithotripsy should be explained to the patients.

Fluoroless Ureteroscopy: Experience in More Than 100 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Ureteroscopy is becoming the primary treatment for ureteral stones. As a standard of care, ureteroscopy is performed under the supervision of fluoroscopy. Recent advances in endourological technology make the need for fluoroscopy questionable. OBJECTIVES: To summarize our experience with a no-fluoroscopy technique for selected cases of ureteral stones. METHODS: Patients were considered suitable for fluoroless ureteroscopy if they had one or two non-impacted stones, in any location in the ureter, 5-10 mm size, with a normal contralateral renal unit and no urinary tract infection. Procedures were performed using rigid scopes, nitinol baskets/forceps for stone retrieval, and Holmium:YAG laser for lithotripsy. Stents were placed per surgeon's decision. RESULTS: During an 18-month period, 103 patients underwent fluoroless ureteroscopy. In 94 patients stones were removed successfully. In six, the stones were pushed to the kidney and treated successfully on a separate session by shock wave lithotripsy. In three patients no stone was found in the ureter. In five patients, miniature perforations in the ureter were noted and an indwelling double J stent was placed. CONCLUSIONS: Fluoroless ureteroscopy resulted in a high rate of success. We believe that in selected cases it can be used with minimal adverse events.

Predicting negative ureteroscopy for stone disease - Minimizing risk and cost.

INTRODUCTION: Urolithiasis is common worldwide, with ureteric stones being a particular burden. Ureteroscopy (URS) is one of the most useful procedures in treating ureteric stones not passed spontaneously; this procedure has a complication risk of 4%. Negative URS, with described rates up to 15%, represents an avoidable patient risk and use of medical resources. OBJECTIVES: To describe rates and identify predictive factors for negative URS and to define strategies which would minimize patient and financial burden from these unnecessary procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study analyzed patients who underwent URS in our Center to treat ureteric stones over a period of 2 years. Patient age, gender, and comorbidities, as well as laboratory and imaging findings, were analyzed. RESULTS: 262 patients underwent URS for ureteric stones. The female population was 50.8% with a mean age of 56.89 years. A total of 78 (29.8%) URS procedures were negative. Univariate analysis showed a higher prevalence of negative URS in female patients, as well as in primary, smaller, and radiolucent stones. At multivariate analysis, a logistic regression model correctly classified 76% of patients, with smaller stone size and radiolucency being significant predictors of negative URS. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Our Center showed a high rate of negative URS, higher than commonly described in the literature. Female patients tend to have an even higher rate, possibly due to unnoticed passage of stones. Patients with small, radiolucent stones showed the highest rates of negative URS.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of various management options for large upper ureteric stones a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

To compare the safety and efficacy of various surgical modalities to manage large (> 1 cm) upper ureter stones. Systematic literature search was conducted to include all randomized studies comparing various treatment options for large (> 1 cm) upper ureteric stones. This review included 13 randomized studies with 1871 patients. Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (LUL) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) were superior to ureteroscopy (URS) and shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) for stone-free rates and need for auxiliary treatments. LUL and PNL were equally effective for stone-free rates and the need for auxiliary treatments. According to SUCRA values for stone-free rates and the need for auxiliary treatments, LUL was the best, followed by PNL. For the duration of surgery, there was no significant difference among all the techniques on network analyses, and SWL was the best according to SUCRA values. Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter for URS than LUL and PNL from network analysis, but there was no significant difference for the rest of the comparisons. Overall complications were similar in all the groups. According to the CINeMa approach, the confidence rating ranged from "very low" to "moderate" for various comparisons. LUL followed by PNL is the most efficacious treatment modality for upper ureteric stones compared to SWL and URS in terms of stone-free rates. However, due to the poor quality of included studies, further high-quality randomized studies are needed.

Evaluation of the patients with flank pain in the emergency department by modified STONE score.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Computed tomography (CT) is generally used for ureteral stone diagnosis. Unnecessary imaging use should be reduced to prevent increased radiation exposure and lower costs. For this reason, scoring systems that evaluate the risk of ureteral stones have been developed. In this study, we aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the modified STONE score (MSS) and its ability to predict ureteral stones. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The research was conducted as a multi-center, prospective and observational study. Patients aged 18 and over who presented to EDs with complaints of flank pain and who received a CT were included. Patients were divided into two groups based on the presence or absence of stones, and the categories of the MSS were determined. The ability of the MSS to predict the ureteral stone and its diagnostic accuracy were calculated. RESULTS: The median age (min/max) of the 367 study patients was 37 (18/91), and 244 (66.5%) were male. A ureteral stone was present in 228 (73.0%) patients. Male gender, previous stone history, duration of pain less than 6 h, presence of hematuria, and CRP value below 0.5 mg/dL were significantly more common in the group with stones. The prevalence of ureter stones in the MSS high-risk group was 96.0%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and sensitivity of the MSS was 0.903 and 0.81, respectively. CONCLUSION: The modified STONE score has high diagnostic performance in suspected urinary stone cases. This scoring system can assist clinicians with radiation reducing decision-making.

Impact of COVID-19 outbreak on urology surgical waiting lists and waiting lists prioritization strategies in the Post-COVID-19 era. / Impacto del brote de COVID-19 en las listas de espera de cirugía urológica y estrategias de priorización en la era post-COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The suspension of most elective surgeries during COVID-19 pandemic caused the lengthening of urology surgical waiting lists. The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on urology surgical waiting list in a high-volume hospital. METHODS: An observational descriptive study was designed. All patients included in the urology surgical waiting list of our high-volume center on May 1st 2020 (46 days after the suspension of elective surgery) were analyzed. Baseline variables, priority on the waiting list, main urological disease, type of scheduled surgery, and waiting time were recorded. Other variables recorded were the presence of a urinary catheter, number of accesses to the emergency department, evidence of COVID-19 infection, number of deaths and their cause. The waiting time for each disease was compared with the time to surgery in 2019. RESULTS: A total of 350 patients were included. The mean (SD) time on the waiting list was 97.33 (55.47) days. Priority 1 patients, who normally should undergo surgery within 30 days, were on the waiting list for a mean (SD) time of 60.51 (20.14) days. They were mainly patients with ureteral lithiasis (25.6%), high-risk or muscle-invasive bladder cancer (20.9%) and high-risk prostate cancer (13.9%). The mean waiting time had already significantly exceeded the mean time to surgery in 2019 for radical cystectomy (p = 0.04) and URS (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The suspension of most elective surgeries due to COVID-19 had a significant impact on urology surgical waiting list of our high-volume center, especially in priority 1 group.

Impacts of the COVID-19 outbreak on visits and treatments for patients with ureteral stones in a general hospital emergency department.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 is a challenge for both patients and physicians in emergency department (ED). This study was aimed to report the impacts of the COVID-19 outbreak on visits and treatments for patients with ureteral stones in a general hospital ED. METHODS: The patients with ureteral stones were collected from 24 January to 24 March 2020 during the COVID-19 outbreak in Beijing. Two periods were divided for study: 24 January to 24 February (Period 1) and 25 February to 24 March (Period 2). Data on patients' characteristics, attendance, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, stone features, and final treatment choices were retrieved from the computer and compared with the data in the same periods in 2019. RESULTS: The study included 376 patients with ureteral stones during the COVID-19 outbreak periods in 2020 and 343 patients during the same periods in 2019. Compared with the same periods in 2019, the number of patients with ureteral stones was less in Period 1 (137 vs 163) but had a rebound phenomenon in Period 2 (239 vs 180). The visit frequency was significantly reduced (2.6 ± 0.4 vs 3.6 ± 0.8, p < 0.01) and the VAS scores and the onset time increased (7.7 ± 1.3 vs 5.5 ± 1.6, p < 0.01; 7.4 ± 1.8 vs 8.2 ± 1.5, p < 0.01, respectively) in Period 1. More patients chose oral analgesics medication to release from renal colic in the COVID-19 outbreak period instead of ESWL and intravenous analgesics medication (Period 1, 54.0% vs 20.2%, p < 0.01; Period 2, 20.9% vs 13.3%, p = 0.044; respectively). However, the percentage of patients underwent endoscopy surgery in outbreak period showed no significant difference compared with that in 2019. CONCLUSION: These results showed that the COVID-19 outbreak can directly affect the visits and final treatment choices for patients with ureteral stones.

Prospective evaluation and classification of endoscopic findings for ureteral calculi.

Difficulty in performing ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL) depends on endoscopic findings surrounding calculi. In this multicentre prospective cohort study of 185 patients with a single ureteral stone who underwent ureteroscopic lithotripsy registered in the SMART study between January 2014 and February 2017, we established a classification of endoscopic findings and analysed risk factors for ureteral changes. We evaluated endoscopic findings (oedema, polyps, ureteral mucosa-stone adherence, and distal ureteric tightness) based on the SMART classification. Operative time and ureteral injuries were significantly correlated with endoscopic finding grades. Multivariate analyses revealed that mucosa-stone adherence (MSA) was strongly affected by hydronephrosis grade (odds ratio, 12.4; p = 0.022) and the interval before surgery (odds ratio, 1.10; p = 0.012). The cutoff value for MSA was 98 days, with a predictive accuracy of 0.78. Risk factors for distal ureteric tightness were age (odds ratio, 0.96; p = 0.004) and early intervention (odds ratio, 0.90; p = 0.023). The cutoff value was 34 days, with a predictive accuracy of 0.72. In conclusion, appropriate intervention around 34 days (limited to 98 days) after symptom onset is necessary for treating ureteral calculi. Even if intervention passed 98 days post-symptom onset, staged URSL, alternative procedures, and detailed informed consent should be planned in advance, assuming strong MSA.

Effect of ureteral calculus in outpatients receiving semirigid ureteroscope laser lithotripsy.

The surgical outcomes of patients with single ureteral stones who had undergone ureteroscopic Holmium laser lithotripsy as outpatients and compare them with those of patients who had received the same procedure as inpatients. Records were obtained from January 2012 to December 2016 for selected patients who had undergone the above mentioned procedure at our institution. Patients were excluded if their ECOG performance status was ≥2, presented with multiple stones or concomitant renal stones, had histories of cancer or congenital urinary system abnormalities, or had undergone urinary system reconstruction surgery. Patients could decide whether to receive the procedure as an outpatient or inpatient. All surgeries were performed by a single surgeon. Patients preoperative, operative, and postoperative data were recorded. The clinical results, such as urinary tract infection, analgesic requirement, rate of returning to the emergency room, stone clearance, surgical complications, and medical expenditure for the treatment courses were analyzed and compared between the 2 cohorts. In total, 303 patients met the inclusion criteria. Among them, 119 patients decided to receive ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy as outpatients, whereas 184 decided to be inpatients. The outpatient cohort was younger (P < .001), had smaller stone diameters (P < .001), and fewer comorbidity factors (P = .038). Patients with a history of stone manipulation favored receiving the procedure under admission (P < .001). After 1:1 propensity score matching, no significant differences were discovered between the cohorts with regard to operative time, rate of lithotripsy failure, and operative complications. Furthermore, rates of stone clearance, post-op urinary tract infection, analgesic requirement, and returning to the emergency room were comparable between the 2 groups. However, the medical expenditure was significantly lower in the outpatient cohort (P < .001). Our data revealed that outpatient ureteroscopic lithotripsy with a Holmium laser was more economical compared with the inpatient group and achieved favorable outcomes for patients with a single ureteral stone.

What predicts spontaneous passage of ≤1 cm ureteral stones in children?

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to determine what factors predict spontaneous passage of ≤1 cm ureteral stones in children. METHODS: Files of the patients diagnosed with a single ureteral stone on a given side between 2008 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with congenital obstructive uropathy, neurogenic bladder, vesicoureteral reflux and those with a stone diameter of >1 cm were excluded. Detection of ureteral stones was done using ultrasonography (US) primarily, and computed tomography when US findings were inconclusive. Patients were treated either conservatively or surgically. Conservative treatment included adequate hydration and pain management whereas surgical treatment included ureteroscopic intervention. Apart from those who required urgent intervention, patients were referred for surgical treatment after 2-4 weeks of follow-up with no spontaneous passage. Factors analyzed for association of spontaneous passage included age, gender, type of hematuria, stone localization, laterality, presence of concomitant kidney stone, degree of hydronephrosis, stone size and stone composition. RESULTS: A total of 70 patients (38 males, 32 females); median age 4.7 years had a ≤ 1 cm ureteral stone (median diameter 7 mm). US was able to diagnose the ureteric stone in 47 patients while computed tomography was required in 23 patients. Spontaneous passage was observed in 40 patients (57.1%). Median time for stone passage was 8 days (3-34 days). Stone size and presence of hematuria (macroscopic and microscopic combined) were factors associated with spontaneous passage and 6.7 mm was found to be the cut-off (AUC = 0.953; 95% CI 0.905-1.000; sensitivity 96.7%, specificity 82.5%, p < 0.001). Moreover, age, degree of hydronephrosis or stone location were not associated with spontaneous passage. CONCLUSION: Patients with a ureteric stone size <6.7 mm can safely be followed conservatively, with a spontaneous passage rate of 82.5%. Type of Study Case series with no comparison group. Level of Evidence IV.

[Time to recurrence after complete removal of calculi from different parts of the urinary system. five-year follow-up study].

INTRODUCTION: The usage of minimally invasive technologies (MIT), such as: extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), transurethral ureterolithotripsy (URS), retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PNL), allows to remove the stones from the calyx and pelvis system with 71- 96% of patients, and those from the ureter in 96.2% cases. However, a high incidence of stone recurrences (35-75%) demands the necessity of repeated lithotripsies and the search of the most appropriate methods of lithotripsy for reduction this indicator. The main goal. To determine the number of patients with recurrence of stone formation during five years after different types of lithotripsy in different parts of the urinary system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The results of the process were analyzed with 491 patients, who had been devided into two groups: group I - 358 patients suffering from the concrements of the ureter; group II - 133 patients having stones in kidney. RESULTS: According to the age criterion, the sample data did not differ from each other (50 years for both groups (p=0.576). The initial number of lithotripsies with complete removal of stones was 80.7% in group I and 70.7% in gr. II, the repeated lithotripsy with usage of the same method was 5.9% and 12.8%, respectively. The usage of an additional method in repeated lithotripsy was necessary in 13.4% and 16.5% of cases respectively. There were differences between the sizes of stones in groups (p<0.0001), besides both groups showed the difference in recurrence time of stone formation (p=0,014). In gr. I weak negative correlation (-0.28) between age and time of recurrence was revealed. The age difference between men and women in both groups (p=0.00001 and p=0.0492, respectively) was found. There occurred differences in the size of stones in men and women groups (p=0.0000001 and p=0.0000001, respectively) and in the time of recurrence between men and women in I gr. (p=0.043). Most of stones were compose of CaOx, the second most important element was Uric Acid. All this testifies to peculiarities of the diet in the region of residence of the patients under control - the Republic of Bashkortostan, where people generally use meat and milk products. DISCUSSION: The usage of MIT opened the possibility of complete stone removal from the urinary system with the most sparing technique. The lithotripsy of stones with any composition having been conducted, additional stone crushing is carried out with 21-59% of patients within 5 years. The investigation of patients detected a great number of recurrences of stones in the kidney stones group. CONCLUSION: 1. After lithotripsy the recurrences during two years did not exceed 4,2% with patients in gr. I and 8,2% in gr. II patients. 2. Significant dependence of recurrent stone formation of gender composition was identified in gr. I and the time of recurrence was less in women. 3. The quantity of CaOx urolithiasis corresponds to global indicators. However, a large number of stones with Uric Acid in the composition indicates possible peculiarities of the patients diet. 4. The highest number of recurrences were in patients with CaOx (42.3%) and CaOx with CaF in the composition (23.1%), and in third place were patients with uric acid stones (19.2%).

Familial risks in urolithiasis in the population of Sweden.

OBJECTIVE: To assess detailed familial risks for medically diagnosed urolithiasis (UL, urinary tract stone disease) based on nationwide hospital and population records. PATIENTS/SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Subjects were identified from the Swedish Multigeneration Register in which there were 211 718 patients with UL. Standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated by comparison to individuals without a family history of UL. RESULTS: The highest familial SIRs were invariably found for the same (concordant) type of UL: 2.18 for kidney, 2.20 for ureter, and 1.93 for bladder. SIRs increased from 1.84, when one parent was affected, to 3.54 when both parents were affected, which was a multiplicative interaction. The SIR was 1.79 when one sibling was affected but it increased to 24.91 when two siblings were affected. Such excessive risks (5.2% of familial cases) are probably explained by high-penetrant genes. A low SIR of 1.29 between spouses suggested a minor contribution by shared environmental factors on the familial risk. CONCLUSIONS: The results point to underlying genetic causes for the observed familial clustering and establish the genetic landscape of UL. Family histories should be taken in UL diagnostics and prevention could follow guidelines recommended for recurrent UL.

Pediatric hospitalizations for upper urinary tract calculi: Epidemiological and treatment trends in the United States, 2001-2014.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of urolithiasis in the pediatric population in the United States has steadily been increasing over the past few decades. Few studies to date have examined trends in the hospitalization and inpatient surgical treatment of urolithiasis in the pediatric population using nationally representative data. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate nationwide trends in the rates of pediatric hospitalization and inpatient surgical activity for upper urinary tract calculi (UUTC) in the United States from 2001 to 2014. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) databases for 2001-2014 were queried. Hospitalizations for patients younger than age 18 (excluding newborns), with principal discharge diagnoses of kidney or ureteral calculi were selected. Surgical procedures during hospitalization were identified. Hospitalization and surgical activity data were analyzed using trends tests, chi-square statistics, and multivariable logistic regression as appropriate. RESULTS: Of an estimated 30.2 million pediatric hospitalizations during the study period, 44,369 overall (147 per 100,000) were for UUTC. The total number and proportion of UUTC hospitalizations per 100,000 all-cause admissions significantly decreased between 2001 and 2014 (p < 0.0001) (figure). Surgical intervention was undertaken in 19,946 (45%) of UUTC hospitalizations, with significantly increasing frequency over the study interval (p < 0.0001). Urinary tract drainage was the most frequently performed surgical intervention. On multivariable analysis, significant predictors of a higher likelihood of undergoing inpatient surgical intervention during hospitalization for UUTC included older age, female gender, deficiency anemias, hypertension, neurologic disorders, paralysis, and hospitalization after 2001. DISCUSSION: The declining trend in hospitalization for UUTC likely reflects a shift toward outpatient care for routine cases, reserving hospitalization for sicker patients or those with complications of urolithiasis. Similar to previous studies, we also observed that girls were significantly more likely than boys to be hospitalized for stone disease, and that majority of the stone activity in the pediatric population was in children aged 15-17 years. We also observed a sharp increase in the proportion of hospitalized patients who underwent surgical intervention between 2001 and 2014, but the primary driver of this trend remains uncertain. CONCLUSION: Pediatric hospitalizations for UUTC in US children significantly decreased between 2001 and 2014, while of those hospitalized the proportion who underwent stone-related surgical intervention significantly increased over the same period. A shift towards outpatient care, reserving hospitalization and inpatient surgical care for sicker patients, those with urolithiasis-related complications, or those who fail conservative management, is a possible explanation for these observed trends.

Variation in Radiologic and Urologic Computed Tomography Interpretation of Urinary Tract Stone Burden: Results From the Registry for Stones of the Kidney and Ureter.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the measured stone burden recorded between urologists and radiologists, and examine how these differences could potentially impact stone management. As current urologic stone surgery guideline recommendations are based on stone size, accurate stone measurements are crucial to direct appropriate treatment. This study investigated the discrepant interpretation that often exists between urologic surgeons and radiologists' estimation of patient urinary stone burden. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From November 2015 through August 2016, new patients prospectively enrolled into the Registry for Stones of the Kidney and Ureter (ReSKU) were included if they had computed tomography images available and an accompanying official radiologic report at the time of their urologist provider visit. Stone number and aggregate stone size were compared between the urologic interpretation and the corresponding radiologic reports. RESULTS: Of 219 patients who met the inclusion criteria, concordance between urologic and radiologic assessment of aggregate stone size was higher for single stone sizing (63%) compared with multiple stones (32%). Statistical significance was found in comparing the mean difference in aggregate stone size for single and multiple stones (P <.01). Over 33% of stone-containing renal units had a radiologic report with an unclear size estimation or size discrepancy that could lead to non-guideline-driven surgical management. CONCLUSION: Significant variation exists between urologic and radiologic computed tomography interpretations of stone burden. Urologists should personally review patient imaging when considering stone surgical management. A standardized method for measuring and reporting stone parameters is needed among urologists and radiologists.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of URSL, RPLU, and MPCNL for treatment of large upper impacted ureteral stones: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There are three minimally invasive methods for the management of large upper impacted ureteral stones: mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL), transurethral ureteroscope lithotripsy (URSL), and retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (RPLU). This study aimed to compare MPCNL, URSL, and RPLU, and to evaluate which one is the best choice for large upper impacted ureteral stones. METHODS: Between January 2012 and December 2015, at the Department of Urology, Huai'an First People's Hospital, 150 consecutively enrolled patients with a large upper impacted ureteral stone (>15 mm) were included. The patients were randomly divided (1:1:1) into the MPCNL, URSL, and RPLU groups. The primary endpoint was success of stone removal measured 1 month postoperatively and the secondary endpoints were intraoperative and postoperative parameters and complications. RESULTS: Fifteen patients needed auxiliary ESWL after URSL, and 3 patients after MPCNL, but none after RPLU. The stone clearance rate was 96% (48/50) in the MPCNL group and 72% (33/46) in the URSL group. In the RPLU group the stones were completely removed and the stone clearance rate was 100% (48/48) (P = 0.021 vs. URSL; P = 0.083 vs. MPCNL). Operation-related complications were similar among the three groups (all P > 0.05). Hospital stay was shorter in the URSL group compared with MPCNL (P = 0.003). Operation time was the shortest with URSL and the longest with MPCNL (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: MPCNL and RPUL are more suitable for upper ureteral impacted stones of >15 mm. URSL could be considered if the patient is not suitable for general anesthesia, or the patient requests transurethral uretroscopic surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Registration number: ChiCTR-INR-17011507 ; Registration date: 2017-5-22).

Ureterolithiasis: Management in an environment with limited facilities.

BACKGROUND: In the past 2-3 decades, there has been a dramatic development in the techniques of stone removal. This study highlights the management of symptomatic ureteral stones in an environment without such facilities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-nine patients, comprising 53 (76.8%) males and 16 (23.2%) females, diagnosed of symptomatic ureteric calculi within the study period in two tertiary health institutions were included in the study. Thorough history taking and physical examinations were performed. Extensive laboratory investigations using blood and urine specimens were carried out. Imaging studies, ultrasonography, intravenous urography, and computerized tomographic scan were used to locate the position and size of the calculi. RESULTS: Forty-six (66.7%) patients presented with excruciating flank ureteric colic radiating to the groin in 16 (23.2%) patients and hematuria in 62 (89.9%) patients. Bilateral ureteric calculi occurred in 3 (4.3%) patients. Eleven (15%) stones passed spontaneously. 33 (47.8%) patients had uneventful open surgery. The stones were mixed in nature. CONCLUSION: Management of ureteric stones in our environment is affected by delay in presentation, low level of awareness of urinary stone disease, lack of modern endourological equipment, and paucity of urological surgeons. Finally, medical treatment should be explored for stones below 10 mm in size.