What is the quickest scoring system to predict percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes? A comparative study among STONE score, Guy's Stone Ccore and CROES nomogram

Página do item simplificado
dc.contributorSistema FMUSP-HC: Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP) e Hospital das Clínicas da FMUSP
dc.contributor.authorVICENTINI, Fabio C.
dc.contributor.authorSERZEDELLO, Felipe R.
dc.contributor.authorTHOMAS, Kay
dc.contributor.authorMARCHINI, Giovanni S.
dc.contributor.authorTORRICELLI, Fabio C. M.
dc.contributor.authorSROUGI, Miguel
dc.contributor.authorMAZZUCCHI, Eduardo
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-06T15:14:29Z
dc.date.available2018-03-06T15:14:29Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.description.abstractObjective: To compare the application time and the capacity of the nomograms to predict the success of Guy's Stone Score (GSS), S.T.O.N.E. Nephrolithometry (STONE) and Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society nephrolithometric nomogram (CROES) of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), evaluating the most efficient one for clinical use. Materials and Methods: We studied 48 patients who underwent PCNL by the same surgeon between 2010 and 2011. We calculated GSS, STONE and CROES based on preoperative non-contrast computed tomography (CT) images and clinical data. A single observer, blinded to the outcomes, reviewed all images and assigned scores. We compared the application time of each nomogram. We used an analysis of variance for repeated measures and multiple comparisons by the Tukey test. We compared the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the three nomograms two by two to determine the most predictive scoring system. Results: The immediate success rate was 66.7% and complications occurred in 16.7% of cases. The average operative time was 122 minutes. Mean application time was significantly lower for the GSS (27.5 seconds) when compared to 300.6 seconds for STONE and 213.4 seconds for CROES (p< 0.001). There was no significant difference among the GSS (AUC= 0.653), STONE (AUC= 0.563) and CROES (AUC= 0.641) in the ability to predict immediate success of PCNL. Conclusions: All three nomograms showed similar ability to predict success of PCNL, however the GSS was the quickest to be applied, what is an important issue for routine clinical use when counseling patients who are candidates to PCNL.
dc.description.indexMEDLINE
dc.identifier.citationINTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, v.43, n.6, p.1102-1109, 2017
dc.identifier.doi10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2016.0586
dc.identifier.eissn1677-6119
dc.identifier.issn1677-5538
dc.identifier.urihttps://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/25440
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherBRAZILIAN SOC UROL
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Braz J Urol
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.rights.holderCopyright BRAZILIAN SOC UROL
dc.subjectNomograms
dc.subjectDiagnosis
dc.subjectCalculi
dc.subject.othersurgical classification-system
dc.subject.otherexternal validation
dc.subject.othergrading system
dc.subject.othersingle-center
dc.subject.otherurolithiasis
dc.subject.othersuccess
dc.subject.othercomplications
dc.subject.othercomplexity
dc.subject.othermanagement
dc.subject.othercriteria
dc.subject.wosUrology & Nephrology
dc.titleWhat is the quickest scoring system to predict percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes? A comparative study among STONE score, Guy's Stone Ccore and CROES nomogram
dc.typearticle
dc.type.categoryoriginal article
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion
dspace.entity.typePublication
hcfmusp.affiliation.countryInglaterra
hcfmusp.affiliation.countryisogb
hcfmusp.author.externalTHOMAS, Kay:Guys & St Thomas Natl Hlth Serv Fdn Hosp, Stone Unit, London, England
hcfmusp.citation.scopus22
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcFABIO CARVALHO VICENTINI
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcFELIPE RIBEIRO SERZEDELLO
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcGIOVANNI SCALA MARCHINI
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcFABIO CESAR MIRANDA TORRICELLI
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcMIGUEL SROUGI
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcEDUARDO MAZZUCCHI
hcfmusp.description.beginpage1102
hcfmusp.description.endpage1109
hcfmusp.description.issue6
hcfmusp.description.volume43
hcfmusp.origemWOS
hcfmusp.origem.pubmed28338303
hcfmusp.origem.scieloSCIELO:S1677-55382017000601102
hcfmusp.origem.scopus2-s2.0-85042160944
hcfmusp.origem.wosWOS:000423671300013
hcfmusp.publisher.cityRIO DE JANEIRO
hcfmusp.publisher.countryBRAZIL
hcfmusp.relation.referenceAkhavein A, 2015, UROLOGY, V85, P69, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2014.09.010
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBozkurt IH, 2015, J ENDOUROL, V29, P1006, DOI 10.1089/end.2015.0199
hcfmusp.relation.referencede la Rosette JJMCH, 2012, EUR UROL, V62, P246, DOI 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.055
hcfmusp.relation.referenceFwu CW, 2013, KIDNEY INT, V83, P479, DOI 10.1038/ki.2012.419
hcfmusp.relation.referenceIngimarsson JP, 2014, UROLOGY, V83, P45, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2013.09.008
hcfmusp.relation.referenceJeong CW, 2013, PLOS ONE, V8, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0065888
hcfmusp.relation.referenceLabadie K, 2015, J UROLOGY, V193, P154, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2014.07.104
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMandal S, 2012, INDIAN J UROL, V28, P392, DOI 10.4103/0970-1591.105749
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMoe OW, 2006, LANCET, V367, P333, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68071-9
hcfmusp.relation.referenceNoureldin YA, 2015, WORLD J UROL, V33, P1821, DOI 10.1007/s00345-015-1508-5
hcfmusp.relation.referenceOkhunov Z, 2013, UROLOGY, V81, P1154, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2012.10.083
hcfmusp.relation.referencePreminger GM, 2007, J UROLOGY, V178, P2418, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2007.09.107
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSakhaee K, 2009, ADV CHRONIC KIDNEY D, V16, P30, DOI 10.1053/j.ackd.2008.10.004
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSfoungaristos S, 2016, J UROLOGY, V195, P372, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2015.08.079
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSfoungaristos S, 2015, J ENDOUROL, V29, P1366, DOI 10.1089/end.2015.0397
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSfoungaristos S, 2015, J ENDOUROL, V29, P1131, DOI 10.1089/end.2015.0273
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSmith A, 2013, J UROLOGY, V190, P149, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2013.01.047
hcfmusp.relation.referenceThomas K, 2011, UROLOGY, V78, P277, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2010.12.026
hcfmusp.relation.referenceTiselius HG, 2003, EUR UROL, V43, P275, DOI 10.1016/S0302-2838(03)00006-X
hcfmusp.relation.referenceTurk C, 2016, EUR UROL, V69, P475, DOI 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.041
hcfmusp.relation.referenceVernez Simone L, 2016, Rev Urol, V18, P15
hcfmusp.relation.referenceVicentini FC, 2014, UROLOGY, V83, P1248, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2013.12.041
hcfmusp.relation.referenceWithington J, 2016, J ENDOUROL, V30, P13, DOI 10.1089/end.2015.0278
hcfmusp.relation.referenceYuhico M P, 2008, Minerva Urol Nefrol, V60, P159
hcfmusp.scopus.lastupdate2024-05-10
relation.isAuthorOfPublication262d23b9-e180-4cc5-b632-04da11648da1
relation.isAuthorOfPublicatione5beb7b4-e35d-46d2-a6c5-ae8e5d9d020b
relation.isAuthorOfPublication4ffbcf66-8d0c-405c-baa2-078de309ce9a
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationf0b42f19-156d-4dc7-8497-8c4da463c962
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationcff561dd-5732-4af5-abe9-538da0cdf4d2
relation.isAuthorOfPublication1ac26bb4-6340-457f-b0dd-6c27ebec0b39
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery262d23b9-e180-4cc5-b632-04da11648da1
Arquivos
Pacote Original
Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
Imagem de Miniatura
Nome:
art_VICENTINI_What_is_the_quickest_scoring_system_to_predict_2017.PDF
Tamanho:
896.33 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descrição:
publishedVersion (English)
Baixar
Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MCG
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/IOT
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/55