Objectives: We aimed to investigate the effect on success of stone-skin distance in CT (Compu-ted Tomography) and HU (Hounsfield units) for ESWL performed renal pelvis stones.
Material and Methods: Between the dates of January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2012, we retrospectively evaluated 49 patients for ESWL performed renal pelvis stones that diameters are changing between 10mm to 15mm. Before ESWL treatment, non-contrast abdominal CT was ta-ken, stone - skin distance, and Hounsfield units of stones were measured. Patients were evaluated after 3 sessions of ESWL. Stone-free rates after ESWL were evaluated in patients with radiog-raphs.
Results: 49 patients, mean age 45.2 ± 15.7, included in the study, the mean BMI was 25.7 ± 3.5kg/m2. The mean stone size, stone-skin dis-tance and stone density (HU) were measured respectively 117.5 ± 58.4 mm2, 10.5 ± 1.4cm and, 878.8 ± 370.4. The mean stone density was found to be a strong predictor value for stone treatment and higher stone density were found in the pati-ents with residual stones (p <0.001).
Conclusion: Success of ESWL depends on stone density, stone-skin distance, BMI, and the size of the stone. The success of ESWL treatment is lower for cases with more stone density and more stone-skin distance. These data should be supported with multicenter prospective rando-mized trials contain larger number of patients.
Key Words: Renal calculi, ESWL, Hounsfield, stone-to-skin distance
Abstract
Objectives: We aimed to investigate the effect on success of stone-skin distance in CT (Compu-ted Tomography) and HU (Hounsfield units) for ESWL performed renal pelvis stones.
Material and Methods: Between the dates of January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2012, we retrospectively evaluated 49 patients for ESWL performed renal pelvis stones that diameters are changing between 10mm to 15mm. Before ESWL treatment, non-contrast abdominal CT was ta-ken, stone - skin distance, and Hounsfield units of stones were measured. Patients were evaluated after 3 sessions of ESWL. Stone-free rates after ESWL were evaluated in patients with radiog-raphs.
Results: 49 patients, mean age 45.2 ± 15.7, included in the study, the mean BMI was 25.7 ± 3.5kg/m2. The mean stone size, stone-skin dis-tance and stone density (HU) were measured respectively 117.5 ± 58.4 mm2, 10.5 ± 1.4cm and, 878.8 ± 370.4. The mean stone density was found to be a strong predictor value for stone treatment and higher stone density were found in the pati-ents with residual stones (p <0.001).
Conclusion: Success of ESWL depends on stone density, stone-skin distance, BMI, and the size of the stone. The success of ESWL treatment is lower for cases with more stone density and more stone-skin distance. These data should be supported with multicenter prospective rando-mized trials contain larger number of patients.
Key Words: Renal calculi, ESWL, Hounsfield, stone-to-skin distance