We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Validation Study
External Validation and Comparisons of the Scoring Systems for Predicting Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Outcomes: A Single Center Experience with 506 Cases.
BACKGROUND: To validate and compare the stone scoring systems (stone size [S], tract length [T], obstruction [O], number of involved calices [N], and essence or stone density [E] [S.T.O.N.E.], Guy's Stone Score [GSS], Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society [CROES], and Seoul National University Renal Stone Complexity [S-ReSC]) used to predict postoperative stone-free status and complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).
METHODS: A total of 567 patients who underwent PCNL for renal stones between January 2012 and August 2015 were included in the recent retrospective study. Sixty-one patients who had not done preoperative CT were excluded from the study. GSS, S.T.O.N.E., S-ReSC, and CROES nephrolithometry scores were calculated for each patient, and their potential association with stone-free status, operative and fluoroscopy time, and length of stay (LOS) was evaluated. Postoperative complications were graded according to the modified Clavien classification, and the correlation of scoring systems with postoperative complications was also investigated.
RESULTS: The mean CROES, S.T.O.N.E., GSS, and S-ReSC scores were 203.7 ± 59.8, 7.52 ± 1.8, 2.08 ± 0.9, and 3.35 ± 2.2, respectively. The overall stone-free rate was 77.9%. All scoring systems were significantly correlated with stone-free status and operation time. While GSS, S.T.O.N.E., and CROES systems were significantly correlated with complication rates (CR), S-ReSC score failed to predict CR. All scoring systems except S.T.O.N.E. were significantly correlated with LOS. CROES and S-ReSC scores were predictive of estimated blood loss (EBL), while GSS and S.T.O.N.E. failed to predict EBL.
CONCLUSIONS: Recent study demonstrated that S.T.O.N.E., GSS, CROES, and S-ReSC scoring systems could effectively predict postoperative stone-free status. Although S-ReSC scoring system failed to predict CR, the rest three scoring systems were significantly correlated with postoperative CR.
METHODS: A total of 567 patients who underwent PCNL for renal stones between January 2012 and August 2015 were included in the recent retrospective study. Sixty-one patients who had not done preoperative CT were excluded from the study. GSS, S.T.O.N.E., S-ReSC, and CROES nephrolithometry scores were calculated for each patient, and their potential association with stone-free status, operative and fluoroscopy time, and length of stay (LOS) was evaluated. Postoperative complications were graded according to the modified Clavien classification, and the correlation of scoring systems with postoperative complications was also investigated.
RESULTS: The mean CROES, S.T.O.N.E., GSS, and S-ReSC scores were 203.7 ± 59.8, 7.52 ± 1.8, 2.08 ± 0.9, and 3.35 ± 2.2, respectively. The overall stone-free rate was 77.9%. All scoring systems were significantly correlated with stone-free status and operation time. While GSS, S.T.O.N.E., and CROES systems were significantly correlated with complication rates (CR), S-ReSC score failed to predict CR. All scoring systems except S.T.O.N.E. were significantly correlated with LOS. CROES and S-ReSC scores were predictive of estimated blood loss (EBL), while GSS and S.T.O.N.E. failed to predict EBL.
CONCLUSIONS: Recent study demonstrated that S.T.O.N.E., GSS, CROES, and S-ReSC scoring systems could effectively predict postoperative stone-free status. Although S-ReSC scoring system failed to predict CR, the rest three scoring systems were significantly correlated with postoperative CR.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app