A New Nomogram to Predict the Success of Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Ureteral Stones

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL International Journal of Clinical Practice Pub Date : 2024-07-03 DOI:10.1155/2024/6872476
Muhammed Fatih Simsekoglu, Engin Derekoylu, Mustafa Ozkaya, Muhammet Demirbilek, Ugur Aferin, Berin Selcuk, Ahmet Erozenci, Bulent Onal
{"title":"A New Nomogram to Predict the Success of Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Ureteral Stones","authors":"Muhammed Fatih Simsekoglu,&nbsp;Engin Derekoylu,&nbsp;Mustafa Ozkaya,&nbsp;Muhammet Demirbilek,&nbsp;Ugur Aferin,&nbsp;Berin Selcuk,&nbsp;Ahmet Erozenci,&nbsp;Bulent Onal","doi":"10.1155/2024/6872476","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p><i>Purpose</i>. To design a new nomogram predicting the probability of stone-free status of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in patients with ureteral stones. <i>Materials and Methods</i>. We retrospectively enrolled 2,144 patients with ureteral stones who underwent SWL between January 1993 and April 2020. The demographic and clinical parameters were assessed. The predictors of stone-free status following SWL were identified. A logistic regression-based nomogram was created by including the significant predictors in the multivariate analysis. <i>Results</i>. The mean age was 42.93 ± 13.85 in the stone-free group (Group 1) and 46.51 ± 13.66 in the treatment-failure group (Group 2) (<i>p</i> = 0.001). The cutoff value of the age was 45.5 years. The mean stone load was 0.71 ± 0.36 cm<sup>2</sup> in Group 1 and 0.96 ± 0.51 cm<sup>2</sup> in Group 2 (<i>p</i> = 0.001). Of the 2,144 patients, 1,708 (79.6%) were stone-free within the first three SWL sessions. According to the multiple logistic regression analysis, older age, a stone load larger than 1 cm<sup>2</sup>, the presence of multiple stones, third-generation lithotripter use, and pre-SWL catheterization were statistically associated with low stone-free rates. The C-index was determined to be 0.75 in the bootstrapping method. <i>Conclusion</i>. A stone load larger than 1 cm<sup>2</sup>, age older than 45.5 years, the presence of multiple stones, new- (third-) generation lithotripter use, and pre-SWL catheterization had statistically significant effects on lower stone-free rates in patients who underwent SWL due to ureteral stones. A nomogram was developed to predict the success of SWL. As a result of the internal validation of the nomogram, it was concluded to be suitable for clinical use.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":13782,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/6872476","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/6872476","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose. To design a new nomogram predicting the probability of stone-free status of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in patients with ureteral stones. Materials and Methods. We retrospectively enrolled 2,144 patients with ureteral stones who underwent SWL between January 1993 and April 2020. The demographic and clinical parameters were assessed. The predictors of stone-free status following SWL were identified. A logistic regression-based nomogram was created by including the significant predictors in the multivariate analysis. Results. The mean age was 42.93 ± 13.85 in the stone-free group (Group 1) and 46.51 ± 13.66 in the treatment-failure group (Group 2) (p = 0.001). The cutoff value of the age was 45.5 years. The mean stone load was 0.71 ± 0.36 cm2 in Group 1 and 0.96 ± 0.51 cm2 in Group 2 (p = 0.001). Of the 2,144 patients, 1,708 (79.6%) were stone-free within the first three SWL sessions. According to the multiple logistic regression analysis, older age, a stone load larger than 1 cm2, the presence of multiple stones, third-generation lithotripter use, and pre-SWL catheterization were statistically associated with low stone-free rates. The C-index was determined to be 0.75 in the bootstrapping method. Conclusion. A stone load larger than 1 cm2, age older than 45.5 years, the presence of multiple stones, new- (third-) generation lithotripter use, and pre-SWL catheterization had statistically significant effects on lower stone-free rates in patients who underwent SWL due to ureteral stones. A nomogram was developed to predict the success of SWL. As a result of the internal validation of the nomogram, it was concluded to be suitable for clinical use.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
预测输尿管结石冲击波碎石术成功率的新标准图
目的设计一种预测输尿管结石患者冲击波碎石术(SWL)无石概率的新提名图。材料和方法。我们回顾性地纳入了 1993 年 1 月至 2020 年 4 月间接受过冲击波碎石术的 2,144 名输尿管结石患者。对人口统计学和临床参数进行了评估。确定了 SWL 术后无结石状态的预测因素。通过将重要的预测因素纳入多变量分析,建立了基于逻辑回归的提名图。结果。无结石组(第 1 组)的平均年龄为 42.93 ± 13.85 岁,治疗失败组(第 2 组)的平均年龄为 46.51 ± 13.66 岁(P = 0.001)。年龄的临界值为 45.5 岁。第 1 组的平均结石量为 0.71 ± 0.36 平方厘米,第 2 组为 0.96 ± 0.51 平方厘米(P = 0.001)。在 2,144 名患者中,1,708 人(79.6%)在前三次 SWL 治疗中无结石。根据多元逻辑回归分析,年龄较大、结石量大于 1 平方厘米、存在多发性结石、使用第三代碎石机以及在 SWL 前接受导管插入术与低无结石率存在统计学关联。在引导法中,C指数被确定为0.75。结论结石体积大于1平方厘米、年龄大于45.5岁、存在多发性结石、使用新一代(第三代)碎石机以及接受SWL导管术前检查对因输尿管结石而接受SWL手术的患者无石率较低有显著的统计学影响。为预测 SWL 的成功率,我们开发了一个提名图。经过内部验证,该提名图被认为适合临床使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
274
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: IJCP is a general medical journal. IJCP gives special priority to work that has international appeal. IJCP publishes: Editorials. IJCP Editorials are commissioned. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion] Perspectives. Most IJCP Perspectives are commissioned. Example. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion] Study design and interpretation. Example. [Always peer reviewed] Original data from clinical investigations. In particular: Primary research papers from RCTs, observational studies, epidemiological studies; pre-specified sub-analyses; pooled analyses. [Always peer reviewed] Meta-analyses. [Always peer reviewed] Systematic reviews. From October 2009, special priority will be given to systematic reviews. [Always peer reviewed] Non-systematic/narrative reviews. From October 2009, reviews that are not systematic will be considered only if they include a discrete Methods section that must explicitly describe the authors'' approach. Special priority will, however, be given to systematic reviews. [Always peer reviewed] ''How to…'' papers. Example. [Always peer reviewed] Consensus statements. [Always peer reviewed] Short reports. [Always peer reviewed] Letters. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion] International scope IJCP publishes work from investigators globally. Around 30% of IJCP articles list an author from the UK. Around 30% of IJCP articles list an author from the USA or Canada. Around 45% of IJCP articles list an author from a European country that is not the UK. Around 15% of articles published in IJCP list an author from a country in the Asia-Pacific region.
期刊最新文献
A Cross-Sectional Study on Nurse-Parent Partnership in the Pediatric Intensive Care Units Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy Reduces Pain and Improves Internal Rotation after Arthroscopic Capsular Release: A Randomized Clinical Trial Why Some People Did Not Want to be Vaccinated against COVID-19? Analysis of Some Psychological Factors Connected with a Decision about Vaccination Predicting the Risk of Fundus Lesions in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Nomogram Model Health Experts’ Perspectives on Barriers, Facilitators, and Needs for Improvement of Hospital Care in the Dying Phase
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1