Are Hounsfield densities of ureteral stones a predictive factor for effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy?

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authorid0000-0001-5337-5226en_US
dc.authorid0000-0003-0395-1154en_US
dc.contributor.authorCakiroglu, Basri
dc.contributor.authorEyyupoglu, S. Erkan
dc.contributor.authorTas, Tuncay
dc.contributor.authorBalci, M. B. Can
dc.contributor.authorHazar, Ismet
dc.contributor.authorAksoy, S. Hilmi
dc.contributor.authorSinanoglu, Orhun
dc.date.accessioned2024-07-12T21:49:47Z
dc.date.available2024-07-12T21:49:47Z
dc.date.issued2014en_US
dc.departmentMaltepe Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractExtracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy (SWL) has long been used successfully to dissolve ureteral stones. We researched whether Hounsfield values of ureteral stones is a factor that affects the success of SWL. Methods: Data from 144 patients who had diagnoses of ureteral stones and underwent SWL, were retrospectively reviewed between January 2011 and December 2012. Urinary tomography of patients was processed and classified into 3 groups by Hounsfield units (Group 1, < 500 HU; Group 2, 500-1000 HU; and Group 3, > 1000 HU) and 2 groups by stone size (Group A; < 1 cm, Group B; > 1 cm). SWL success was analyzed for both of these group types. Failure was defined as any fragments of the stone that remained within the ureter. Results were analyzed by evaluating the predictive factors in both groups. Results: The study included 144 patients (100 men, 44 women) who fit the inclusion criteria. In Hounsfield unit Group 1 (12 women and 44 men), the mean age was 37.2 +/- 13.2, stone size was 8.5 +/- 2.5 mm, number of shocks was 3240 +/- 1414 (1200-7500) and number of treatments was 1.4 +/- 0.6. In Group 2 (26 women and 32 men), the mean age was 33.6 +/- 7.6, stone size was 9.6 +/- 3.1 mm, process number was 3375 +/- 2103 (1200-8750) and shock amount was 1.6 +/- 0.8. In Group 3 (6 women and 24 men), the mean age was 42.2 +/- 13.6, stone size was 11.7 +/- 3.0 mm, number of shocks was 4513 +/- 2458 (1300-8700) and number of treatments was 2.1 +/- 1.2. In size Group 1 (28 women and 74 men), the mean age was 35.8 +/- 10.6, stone size was 8.1 +/- 1.4 mm, process number was 3105 +/- 1604, shock amount was 1.4 +/- 0.5 and HU value was 580 +/- 297. In Group 2 (16 women and 26 men), the mean age was 39.9 +/- 14.2, stone size was 13.9 +/- 2.4 mm, number of shocks was 4722 +/- 2467, number of treatments was 2.3 +/- 1.1 and HU value was 912 +/- 270. Conclusion: Although stone density predicted the failure of SWL, size of the stone is more important criterion for successful lithotripsy of ureteral stones.en_US
dc.identifier.endpage1283en_US
dc.identifier.issn1940-5901
dc.identifier.issue5en_US
dc.identifier.pmid24995083en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84902176575en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityN/Aen_US
dc.identifier.startpage1276en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12415/8083
dc.identifier.volume7en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000341254800010en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherE-CENTURY PUBLISHING CORPen_US
dc.relation.ispartofINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINEen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.snmzKY01280
dc.subjectUreteral stoneen_US
dc.subjectSWLen_US
dc.subjectstone sizeen_US
dc.subjectHounsfield uniten_US
dc.titleAre Hounsfield densities of ureteral stones a predictive factor for effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy?en_US
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu