Expectant Management of Ureter Stones: Outcome and Clinical Factors of Spontaneous Passage in a Single Institution's Experience

Nomogram to predict the risk of adverse outcomes in patients with residual stones following percutaneous nephrolithotomy

PURPOSE

To investigate the risk factors associated with adverse outcomes in patients with residual stones after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and to establish a nomogram to predict the probability of adverse outcomes based on these risk factors.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of 233 patients who underwent PCNL for upper urinary tract calculi and had postoperative residual stones. The patients were divided into two groups according to whether adverse outcomes occurred, and the risk factors for adverse outcomes were explored by univariate and multivariate analyses. Finally, we created a nomogram for predicting the risk of adverse outcomes in patients with residual stones after PCNL.

RESULTS

In this study, adverse outcomes occurred in 125 (53.6%) patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that the independent risk factors for adverse outcomes were the diameter of the postoperative residual stones (P < 0.001), a positive urine culture (P = 0.022), and previous stone surgery (P = 0.004). The above independent risk factors were used as variables to construct the nomogram. The nomogram model was internally validated. The calculated concordance index was 0.772. The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was performed (P > 0.05). The area under the ROC curve of this model was 0.772.

CONCLUSIONS

Larger diameter of residual stones, positive urine culture, and previous stone surgery were significant predictors associated with adverse outcomes in patients with residual stones after PCNL. Our nomogram could help to assess the risk of adverse outcomes quickly and effectively in patients with residual stones after PCNL.

Primary Definitive Treatment versus Ureteric Stenting in the Management of Acute Ureteric Colic: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Objectives: To analyze the differences in cost-effectiveness between primary ureteroscopy and ureteric stenting in patients with ureteric calculi in the emergency setting. Patients and Methods: Patients requiring emergency intervention for a ureteric calculus at a tertiary centre were analysed between January and December 2019. The total secondary care cost included the cost of the procedure, inpatient hospital bed days, emergency department (A&E) reattendances, ancillary procedures and any secondary definitive procedure. Results: A total of 244 patients were included. Patients underwent ureteric stenting (62.3%) or primary treatment (37.7%), including primary ureteroscopy (URS) (34%) and shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) (3.6%). The total secondary care cost was more significant in the ureteric stenting group (GBP 4485.42 vs. GBP 3536.83; p = 0.65), though not statistically significant. While mean procedural costs for primary treatment were significantly higher (GBP 2605.27 vs. GBP 1729.00; p < 0.001), costs in addition to the procedure itself were significantly lower (GBP 931.57 vs. GBP 2742.35; p < 0.001) for primary treatment compared to ureteric stenting. Those undergoing ureteric stenting had a significantly higher A&E reattendance rate compared with primary treatment (25.7% vs. 10.9%, p = 0.02) and a significantly greater cost per patient related to revisits to A&E (GBP 61.05 vs. GBP 20.87; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Primary definitive treatment for patients with acute ureteric colic, although associated with higher procedural costs than ureteric stenting, infers a significant reduction in additional expenses, notably related to fewer A&E attendances. This is particularly relevant in the COVID-19 era, where it is crucial to avoid unnecessary attendances to A&E and reduce the backlog of delayed definitive procedures. Primary treatment should be considered concordance with clinical judgement and factors such as patient preference, equipment availability and operator experience.

Opioid usage differs significantly following ureteroscopy and shockwave lithotripsy, while development of long-term usage is positively correlated with total days' supply and total MME supplied

PURPOSE

This study evaluated possible predictors of long-term opioid usage among patients with ureteric stones who received ureteroscopy (URS) or shockwave lithotripsy (SWL). We also assessed opioid usage characteristics of URS and SWL recipients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study used IQVIA PharMetrics^® Plus for Academics administrative claims database from years 2006-2020 to identify patients with a diagnosis of kidney or ureteral stones who were treated with either SWL or URS. We performed unadjusted bivariate analyses to compare opioid use characteristics of URS and SWL recipients, and performed logistic regression to determine demographic and clinical factors associated with becoming a long-term opioid user.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of opioid naive individuals having a diagnosis of a kidney stone who underwent URS (N = 9407) or SWL (N = 4894). About 6.7% (N = 964) of study subjects were long-term opioid users. Unadjusted bivariate associations showed that compared to non-long-term opioid users, long-term opioid users had significantly greater total days' supply, total morphine milliequivalents (MME) supplied, and claims per month. A similar trend was observed for URS (vs. SWL) recipients. However, compared to SWL recipients, URS recipients had 14.3% (1.2-25.6%; p = 0.034) lower odds of becoming long-term users. Total days' supply (OR: 1.041 (95% CI 1.030-1.052; p < 0.001) and total MME supplied (OR 1.001 (95% CI 1.000-1.001; p < 0.001) were significantly associated with long-term usage.

CONCLUSION

Higher total days' supply and total MME supplied as well as SWL were identified as risk factors for becoming long-term opioid users.

What is the role of inflammatory markers in predicting spontaneous ureteral stone passage?

PURPOSE

To investigate the role of inflammatory markers in predicting the spontaneous passage of ureteral stones.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 279 patients with ureteral stones sized 4-10 mm that were managed conservatively. The patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 consisted of 137 patients who passed the stone spontaneously; Group 2 comprised 142 patients without spontaneous stone passage. The groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney U and chi-square tests. In addition, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the significance of the parameters.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 41.2 years. The patients in Group 1 had a significantly lower mean stone size, white blood cell count and neutrophil count. In addition, stone location, presence of hydronephrosis and history of urolithiasis were significantly different between the groups. Neutrophil percentage, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio were insignificantly lower in Group 1. In a multivariate analysis, stone size, distal location and hydronephrosis status significantly predicted the spontaneous stone passage. However, inflammatory markers including white blood cell count, neutrophil count and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio could not determine the likelihood of spontaneous stone passage.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that inflammatory markers are no meaningful parameters for the prediction of spontaneous stone passage.

Is Combined Ultrasound with Radiography Sufficient for the Diagnosis of Obstructive Ureteric Stone in Patients with Acute Flank Pain?

Context

Ultrasound (US) is excellent for detection of hydronephrosis but has poor sensitivity for stone detection. In contrast, radiography of the kidney-ureter-bladder has better sensitivity for detection of stone but limited sensitivity for hydronephrosis detection. A combination of these two modalities may improve both sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of obstructive ureteric stone.

Aims

This study aims to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of combined US with radiography for the diagnosis of obstructive ureteric stone in adult patients.

Settings and Design

Retrospective study with retrospective data collection performed in a 1500-bed university hospital.

Materials and Methods

A total of 90 patients were included. The electronic medical record, radiological reports, laboratory results, and patient management were extracted and analyzed.

Statistical Analysis Used

The diagnostic performance of US, radiography, and combined US with radiography were calculated and compared. The computed tomography was used as diagnostic reference.

Results

US alone had a sensitivity of 73.5%, specificity of 92.7%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 74.5% for hydronephrosis. When US showed both ureteric stone and hydronephrosis, sensitivity dropped to 14.3% but specificity increased to 100%. Radiography alone had a sensitivity of 34.7%, specificity of 100%, and NPV of 56.2% for the detection of ureteric stone. Combining radiography with US raised the sensitivity for diagnosis of obstructive ureteric stone to 88% with a specificity of 93% and accuracy of 90%.

Conclusions

Combined US with radiography was accurate for the diagnosis of obstructive ureteric stone in patients presenting with acute flank pain.

What predicts spontaneous passage of ≤1 cm ureteral stones in children?

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to determine what factors predict spontaneous passage of ≤1 cm ureteral stones in children.

METHODS

Files of the patients diagnosed with a single ureteral stone on a given side between 2008 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with congenital obstructive uropathy, neurogenic bladder, vesicoureteral reflux and those with a stone diameter of >1 cm were excluded. Detection of ureteral stones was done using ultrasonography (US) primarily, and computed tomography when US findings were inconclusive. Patients were treated either conservatively or surgically. Conservative treatment included adequate hydration and pain management whereas surgical treatment included ureteroscopic intervention. Apart from those who required urgent intervention, patients were referred for surgical treatment after 2-4 weeks of follow-up with no spontaneous passage. Factors analyzed for association of spontaneous passage included age, gender, type of hematuria, stone localization, laterality, presence of concomitant kidney stone, degree of hydronephrosis, stone size and stone composition.

RESULTS

A total of 70 patients (38 males, 32 females); median age 4.7 years had a ≤ 1 cm ureteral stone (median diameter 7 mm). US was able to diagnose the ureteric stone in 47 patients while computed tomography was required in 23 patients. Spontaneous passage was observed in 40 patients (57.1%). Median time for stone passage was 8 days (3-34 days). Stone size and presence of hematuria (macroscopic and microscopic combined) were factors associated with spontaneous passage and 6.7 mm was found to be the cut-off (AUC = 0.953; 95% CI 0.905-1.000; sensitivity 96.7%, specificity 82.5%, p < 0.001). Moreover, age, degree of hydronephrosis or stone location were not associated with spontaneous passage.

CONCLUSION

Patients with a ureteric stone size <6.7 mm can safely be followed conservatively, with a spontaneous passage rate of 82.5%. Type of Study Case series with no comparison group. Level of Evidence IV.

Efficacy of Tamsulosin plus Tadalafil versus Tamsulosin as Medical Expulsive Therapy for Lower Ureteric Stones: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction

Urolithiasis is one of the common disorder with which about 1/5^th is found in the ureter, of which 2/3^rd is seen in the lower ureter. Medical expulsive therapy is one of the routine modalities of treatment which uses various drugs acting on the ureter smooth muscle by different mechanism. We aim to compare the efficacy of combination vs. single drug.

Methods

This randomized controlled trial was done in 176 consecutive patients over a period of six months (March 2019 to August 2019) in Department of Urology and Kidney Transplant Surgery, Tribhuvan University Teaching. Participants were divided into two groups (Group A, tamsulosin plus tadalafil, and Group B, tamsulosin) from computer-generated random numbers. Therapy was continued for a maximum of 3 weeks. Stone expulsion rate, time to stone expulsion, analgesic use, number of colic and emergency room visits for pain, early intervention, and adverse effects of drugs were recorded.

Results

Among 176 patients who were enrolled in study, 7 were lost to follow-up, and 5 people required immediate intervention. There was a significant higher stone passage rate in group A than group B (64 vs. 50; P=0.025) and shorter expulsion time (1.66 vs. 2.32 weeks P=0.001) and less number of emergency room visits and colic episodes. No significant side effects were noted during study.

Conclusion

Tamsulosin plus Tadalafil is more effective than tamsulosin with early passage of stone and decreased number of colic episodes and emergency visits without significant side effects for lower ureteric calculi of 5 mm to 10 mm.

Assessment of factors affecting the spontaneous passage of lower ureteric calculus on the basis of lower ureteric calculus diameter, density, and plasma C- reactive protein level

Introduction:

The study aimed to evaluate the factors which affect the spontaneous passage of lower ureteric calculus on the basis of noncontrast computed tomography kidneys, ureters, and bladder (NCCT KUB) stone diameter, stone density, and plasma C-reactive protein (CRP) level.

Materials and Methods:

We conducted a prospective study of 200 patients with lower ureteric calculus 5–10 mm in size, from October 2015 to December 2016. All patients underwent NCCT KUB region with a 5 mm axial and reformatted coronal section. Edema just above the calculus and rim sign at the level of calculus and density of calculus is evaluated. Only scan with isolated, unilateral, solitary ureteric calculus was included in the final analysis and monitored up to 4 weeks, and plasma CRP is estimated in all patients to determine the clinical outcome.

Results:

A total of 200 patients (145 males, 55 females; mean age ± standard deviation, 34.73 ± 10.29) were included in the study. Lower ureteric calculus between 5–7 mm passed in 70% and 7–10 mm passed in 40%. There was 18% underestimation of maximum stone diameter in axial plane as compared to coronal plane. For spontaneous passage of calculus, craniocaudal (CC) diameter is more reliable then axial in NCCT. Rim sign and edema is absent in 64% of those passed spontaneous calculus. CRP level more than 2.45 mg/dl has low spontaneous expulsion rate. The stone with different HU passes through the ureter with same rate.

Conclusion:

Plasma CRP level and CC diameter and absence of rim sign on NCCT KUB are more reliable factors then density for spontaneous passage of ureteric calculus.

Alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy for ureteral stones

BACKGROUND

Ureteral colic is a common reason for patients to seek medical care. Alpha-blockers are commonly used to improve stone passage through so-called medical expulsive therapy (MET), but their effectiveness remains controversial. This is an update of a 2014 Cochrane review; since that time, several large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been reported, making this update relevant.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effects of alpha-blockers compared with standard therapy for ureteral stones 1 cm or smaller confirmed by imaging in adult patients presenting with symptoms of ureteral stone disease.

SEARCH METHODS

On 18 November 2017, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, and Embase. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO Portal/ICTRP to identify all published/unpublished and ongoing trials. We checked all references of included and review articles and conference proceedings for articles relevant to this review. We sent letters to investigators to request information about unpublished or incomplete studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs of ureteral stone passage in adult patients that compared alpha-blockers versus standard therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors screened studies for inclusion and extracted data using standard methodological procedures. We performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Primary outcomes were stone clearance and major adverse events; secondary outcomes were stone expulsion time, number of pain episodes, use of diclofenac, hospitalisation, and surgical intervention. We assessed the quality of evidence on a per-outcome basis using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 67 studies with 10,509 participants overall. Of these, 15 studies with 5787 participants used a placebo.Stone clearance: Based on the overall analysis, treatment with an alpha-blocker may result in a large increase in stone clearance (risk ratio (RR) 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36 to 1.55; low-quality evidence). A subset of higher-quality, placebo-controlled trials suggest that the likely effect is probably smaller (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.25; moderate-quality evidence), corresponding to 116 more (95% CI 51 more to 182 more) stone clearances per 1000 participants.Major adverse events: Based on the overall analysis, treatment with an alpha-blocker may have little effect on major adverse events (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.96; low-quality evidence). A subset of higher-quality, placebo-controlled trials suggest that alpha-blockers likely increase the risk of major adverse events slightly (RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.13 to 3.86), corresponding to 29 more (95% CI 3 more to 75 more) major adverse events per 1000 participants.Patients treated with alpha-blockers may experience shorter stone expulsion times (mean difference (MD) -3.40 days, 95% CI -4.17 to -2.63; low-quality evidence), may use less diclofenac (MD -82.41, 95% CI -122.51 to -42.31; low-quality evidence), and likely require fewer hospitalisations (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.77; moderate-quality evidence), corresponding to 69 fewer hospitalisations (95% CI 93 fewer to 32 fewer) per 1000 participants. Meanwhile, the need for surgical intervention appears similar (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.02; low-quality evidence), corresponding to 28 fewer surgical interventions (95% CI 51 fewer to 2 more) per 1000 participants.A predefined subgroup analysis (test for subgroup differences; P = 0.002) suggests that effects of alpha-blockers may vary with stone size, with RR of 1.06 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.15; P = 0.16; I² = 62%) for stones 5 mm or smaller versus 1.45 (95% CI 1.22 to 1.72; P < 0.0001; I² = 59%) for stones larger than 5 mm. We found no evidence suggesting possible subgroup effects based on stone location or alpha-blocker type.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For patients with ureteral stones, alpha-blockers likely increase stone clearance but probably also slightly increase the risk of major adverse events. Subgroup analyses suggest that alpha-blockers may be less effective for smaller (5 mm or smaller) than for larger stones (greater than 5 mm).

Herbal remedies for urinary stones used in India and China: A review

ETHANOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

The process of formation or appearance of a urinary stone anywhere in the renal tract is known as urolithiasis. It is a longstanding health problem, known to exist since early age of civilization. Records about symptoms, signs and treatment strategies of urinary stones diseases are found in the several ancient texts of traditional medicines such as Ayurveda, Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), Siddha and Unani. In Ayurveda, urolithiasis has been considered as one of the eight most troublesome diseases. Ayurvedic management and cure of urinary stone involves herbal formulas, alkaline liquids and surgical procedures. Whereas, TCM recommends polyherbal drugs, acupuncture and mexibustion for treatment of the urinary stones. Among these therapies, herbal remedies are in practice till today for the treatment and cure urinary stone diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive review of the scientific literature about pathophysiology of urinary stones and antiurolithiatic plants was undertaken using the following bibliographic databases: MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar. The search was conducted from publications from all years until Dec., 2015 by combination of the search terms and Boolean operators; 'urinary stone' OR 'kidney stone' AND 'plant' OR 'medicine' OR 'antiurolithiatic plants'. Outputs were restricted to those completed studies only published in English. In this review, literatures about plants which are used as diuretic and/or in treatment urinary tract infections have not also been considered. The Plant List and Royal Botanical Garden, Kew databases were used to authenticate botanical names of plants. Books and monographs published in English were used to collect information about historical records of antiurolithiatic plants.

RESULTS

Recent pharmacological interventions accredited ancient antiurolithiatic claims to several plants and their formulations. The majority of antiurolithiatic plants were found to either dissolve the stones or inhibit the process of urinary stone formation. Plants such as Phyllanthus niruri L. and Elymus repens (L.) Gould, as well as herbal products including 'Wu-Ling-San' formula, 'Cystone' and 'Herbmed' have been proved their utility as promising antiurolithiatic medicines in the different phases of clinical trials. In addition, some of the isolated phytochemicals such as berberine, lupeol, khelin, visnagin, 7-hydroxy-2',4',5'-trimethoxyisoflavone and 7-hydroxy-4'-methoxyisoflavone were reported to have potent antiurolithiatic activity.

CONCLUSION

In ancient medicinal texts, antiurolithiatic potential has been ascribed to several plants and their formulations. Present scientific studies provide scientific evidences for few of these claims however, they are insufficient to establish many of these plants and herbal formulations as therapeutic remedies for the treatment and management of urinary stones. Conversely, findings of pre-clinical and clinical studies about some plants and herbal formulations are promising, which underlines the utility of herbal remedies as alternative medicines for the treatment and management of urinary stones in the future.

Is acute ureteroscopy for painful ureteric colic cost effective and beneficial for patients? a cost-analysis

Introduction and objectives:

Admissions for ureteric colic are relatively common, with up to 80% of stones passing spontaneously. In patients with refractory pain, drainage with stenting, percutaneous nephrostomy or stone removal can be performed. Due to the financial restrictions of the NHS, it is paramount to ensure patients are receiving optimal cost-effective care. We present a cost effectiveness analysis between primary ureteric stenting and emergency ureteroscopic stone removal in patients with refractory pain secondary to acute ureteric calculi.

Methods:

Fifty patients were analysed who underwent either primary ureteric stenting or emergency ureteroscopic stone removal in our institution. Each group contained 25 consecutive patients. The primary outcomes compared were: time to stone-free status, number of hospital re-admissions, and overall cost of treatment until stone free.

Results:

Both stenting ( n=25) and ureteroscopic stone removal ( n=25) groups were comparable with respect to age, sex, stone size and location. The hospital re-admission rate secondary to stone-specific issues was significantly lower in the ureteroscopy group, two versus 20. Patients became stone free significantly quicker in the ureteroscopy group (2.5 days vs. 61.9 days). The total overall cost until being declared stone free was significantly lower in the ureteroscopy group (£3104 vs. £4041, P⩽0.001).

Conclusions:

This study highlights that those patients undergoing ureteric stenting take significantly longer to become stone free, leading to increased hospital re-admissions, potentially increased morbidity and inevitably greater cost implications. We advocate that primary ureteroscopic stone removal should be consider instead of ureteric stenting in patients with ongoing, painful ureteric colic.

Use of drug therapy in the management of symptomatic ureteric stones in hospitalised adults: a multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis of a calcium channel blocker (nifedipine) and an alpha-blocker (tamsulosin) (the SUSPEND trial)

BACKGROUND

Ureteric colic, the term used to describe the pain felt when a stone passes down the ureter from the kidney to the bladder, is a frequent reason for people to seek emergency health care. Treatment with the muscle-relaxant drugs tamsulosin hydrochloride (Petyme, TEVA UK Ltd) and nifedipine (Coracten(®), UCB Pharma Ltd) as medical expulsive therapy (MET) is increasingly being used to improve the likelihood of spontaneous stone passage and lessen the need for interventional procedures. However, there remains considerable uncertainty around the effectiveness of these drugs for routine use.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether or not treatment with either tamsulosin 400 µg or nifedipine 30 mg for up to 4 weeks increases the rate of spontaneous stone passage for people with ureteric colic compared with placebo, and whether or not it is cost-effective for the UK NHS.

DESIGN

A pragmatic, randomised controlled trial comparing two active drugs, tamsulosin and nifedipine, against placebo. Participants, clinicians and trial staff were blinded to treatment allocation. A cost-utility analysis was performed using data gathered during trial participation.

SETTING

Urology departments in 24 UK NHS hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults aged between 18 and 65 years admitted as an emergency with a single ureteric stone measuring ≤ 10 mm, localised by computerised tomography, who were able to take trial medications and complete trial procedures.

INTERVENTIONS

Eligible participants were randomised 1 : 1 : 1 to take tamsulosin 400 µg, nifedipine 30 mg or placebo once daily for up to 4 weeks to make the following comparisons: tamsulosin or nifedipine (MET) versus placebo and tamsulosin versus nifedipine.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary effectiveness outcome was the proportion of participants who spontaneously passed their stone. This was defined as the lack of need for active intervention for ureteric stones at up to 4 weeks after randomisation. This was determined from 4- and 12-week case-report forms completed by research staff, and from the 4-week participant self-reported questionnaire. The primary economic outcome was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained over 12 weeks. We estimated costs from NHS sources and calculated QALYs from participant completion of the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions health status questionnaire 3-level response (EQ-5D-3L™) at baseline, 4 weeks and 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Primary outcome analysis included 97% of the 1167 participants randomised (378/391 tamsulosin, 379/387 nifedipine and 379/399 placebo participants). The proportion of participants who spontaneously passed their stone did not differ between MET and placebo [odds ratio (OR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.43; absolute difference 0.8%, 95% CI -4.1% to 5.7%] or between tamsulosin and nifedipine [OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.53; absolute difference 1%, 95% CI -4.6% to 6.6%]. There was no evidence of a difference in QALYs gained or in cost between the trial groups, which means that the use of MET would be very unlikely to be considered cost-effective. These findings were unchanged by extensive sensitivity analyses around predictors of stone passage, including sex, stone size and stone location.

CONCLUSIONS

Tamsulosin and nifedipine did not increase the likelihood of stone passage over 4 weeks for people with ureteric colic, and use of these drugs is very unlikely to be cost-effective for the NHS. Further work is required to investigate the phenomenon of large, high-quality trials showing smaller effect size than meta-analysis of several small, lower-quality studies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN69423238. European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT) number 2010-019469-26.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 63. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

[CLINICAL FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH SPONTANEOUS PASSAGE OF URETER STONES IN CONSERVATIVE MANAGEMENT: 6 mm IN MAXIMAL STONE SIZE MEASURED BY ULTRASONOGRAPHY CAN BE A PREDICTIVE BORDER]

(Purpose) To date there was no consensus regarding expectant size of stone and time to expulsion in the conservative treatment of ureter stones. The aim of this study was to find the clinical factors associated with stone passage by evaluating the outcome of ureter stones with expectant management in Japanese. (Materials and methods) A total of 679 ureter stone cases who visited our hospital with acute real colic and/or hematuria between 2009 and 2013, and who had decided to be treated by expectant management with or without medical expulsive therapy were enrolled in this study. All cases were examined size, location and presence of stone, and degree of hydronephrosis with ultrasonography. The examined data plus clinical data such as gender, age, side and body mass index were analyzed to find the factors related to spontaneous passage of ureter stones. Statistical analysis was performed to predict whether the factors were associated with the ureteral stone expulsion or not. (Results) Accumulated residual stone curve using Kaplan-Meier method showed time to 50%-expulsion as 15.7 days in cases with stone size no more than 6.0 mm and that as 21.8 days in those with greater than 6.0 mm, and time to 50%-expulsion as 28.8 days in cases with upper ureter stone whereas 15.6 days in those with middle or distal ureter stone. Analysis in groups with 1 mm-interval in stone size showed statistical significance only when compared 5-6 mm group with 6-7 mm group in size. Multivariate analysis showed stone size and location as statistically significant and independent factors to predict time to expulsion within 30 days. (Conclusion) Stone size and location was statistically reconfirmed to be associated with spontaneous passage in expectant management of ureter stones. This study statistically demonstrated the possibility that 6 mm in maximal stone size measured by ultrasonography can be a predictive border. 75% of ureter stones within 6 mm in maximal size measured by ultrasonography may expect to be expelled within 30 days.

Medical expulsive treatment in pediatric urolithiasis

The frequency of stone disease in childhood ranges between 0.1-5 percent. Stone disease occurs as a result of enviromental, metabolic, anatomical, infectious and nutritional factors. Percutaneous nephrolitotomy, uretherorenoscopy, laparoscopic surgery, open surgery and extracorporeal shock wave lithothripsy are treatment alternatives for stone disease during childhood. However, these methods are not completely innocent. Some complications may occur after these procedures. These procedures are generally not cost- effective. Even invasive procedures have high success rates, so medical expulsive treatment modalities have become an alternative for a group of patients. Nonsteroidal anti- inflammatory drugs, antimuscarinic drugs, phospodiesterase type 5 inhibitors, steroids, calcium channel blockers and alpha blockers are treatment alterneatives used for this modality in the literature. The drug is chosen according to the location, size, and composition of the stone, recent technology, cost, surgeon's experience and surgeon's and the parents' preferences. In this review article the following topics will be discussed such as "Why medical expulsive treatment is needed during childhood? Which drug should be chosen for which stone type? How long should a treatment of urolithiasis last?

Medical expulsive therapy in adults with ureteric colic: a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Meta-analyses of previous randomised controlled trials concluded that the smooth muscle relaxant drugs tamsulosin and nifedipine assisted stone passage for people managed expectantly for ureteric colic, but emphasised the need for high-quality trials with wide inclusion criteria. We aimed to fulfil this need by testing effectiveness of these drugs in a standard clinical care setting.

METHODS

For this multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial, we recruited adults (aged 18-65 years) undergoing expectant management for a single ureteric stone identified by CT at 24 UK hospitals. Participants were randomly assigned by a remote randomisation system to tamsulosin 400 μg, nifedipine 30 mg, or placebo taken daily for up to 4 weeks, using an algorithm with centre, stone size (≤5 mm or >5 mm), and stone location (upper, mid, or lower ureter) as minimisation covariates. Participants, clinicians, and trial personnel were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants who did not need further intervention for stone clearance within 4 weeks of randomisation, analysed in a modified intention-to-treat population defined as all eligible patients for whom we had primary outcome data. This trial is registered with the European Clinical Trials Database, EudraCT number 2010-019469-26, and as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number 69423238.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 11, 2011, and Dec 20, 2013, we randomly assigned 1167 participants, 1136 (97%) of whom were included in the primary analysis (17 were excluded because of ineligibility and 14 participants were lost to follow-up). 303 (80%) of 379 participants in the placebo group did not need further intervention by 4 weeks, compared with 307 (81%) of 378 in the tamsulosin group (adjusted risk difference 1·3% [95% CI -5·7 to 8·3]; p=0·73) and 304 (80%) of 379 in the nifedipine group (0·5% [-5·6 to 6·5]; p=0·88). No difference was noted between active treatment and placebo (p=0·78), or between tamsulosin and nifedipine (p=0·77). Serious adverse events were reported in three participants in the nifedipine group (one had right loin pain, diarrhoea, and vomiting; one had malaise, headache, and chest pain; and one had severe chest pain, difficulty breathing, and left arm pain) and in one participant in the placebo group (headache, dizziness, lightheadedness, and chronic abdominal pain).

INTERPRETATION

Tamsulosin 400 μg and nifedipine 30 mg are not effective at decreasing the need for further treatment to achieve stone clearance in 4 weeks for patients with expectantly managed ureteric colic.

FUNDING

UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Ultrasonography for the prediction of urological surgical intervention in patients with renal colic

CONTEXT

There are no clear indicators of which ultrasound findings in an emergency department (ED) renal colic population are predictive of urological surgical intervention.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the sonographic findings of renal colic that predict surgical intervention.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 500 consecutive ED patients with a diagnosis of renal colic that had ultrasonography (performed by radiology) during their ED visit. Our main outcome was urological surgical intervention. This was defined as extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrostomy or ureteroscopy performed within 16 weeks of the initial ED presentation.

RESULTS

Of the 500 identified patients, 483 met our eligibility criteria. Of this group, 67 (13.9%) received a surgical intervention. Ultrasound (US) findings were 97% (95% CI 88.7% to 99.5%) sensitive and 28.1% (23.9% to 32.8%) specific in 'diagnosing' the requirement for surgery when the ultrasound (US) showed either at least a stone present or showed moderate to severe hydronephrosis. The presence of stone and moderate to severe hydronephrosis had a + likelihood ratio (LR) 3.86 (2.46 to 6.07) and a -LR 0.72 (0.60 to 0.86). Having a stone ≥6 mm had a sensitivity of 77.6% (65.5% to 86.5%), a specificity of 73.6% (69.0% to 77.7%), a +LR of 2.94 (2.39 to 3.6) and a -LR 0.30 (0.19 to 0.48).

CONCLUSIONS

Radiology performed ultrasonography is a valuable tool for identifying renal colic that will go on to receive a surgical intervention in the 16 weeks following an ED visit. Further studies are needed to confirm the utility of ultrasound findings of stone visualisation, stone size and moderate to severe hydronephrosis in determining which patients need outpatient urology follow-up.

Randomized controlled trial to compare the safety and efficacy of naftopidil and tamsulosin as medical expulsive therapy in combination with prednisolone for distal ureteral stones

Purpose

To compare the safety and efficacy of naftopidil and tamsulosin with prednisolone as medical expulsive therapy for distal ureteric stones.

Materials and Methods

Between July 2010 and March 2012, 120 adult patients presenting with distal ureteric stones of size 5 to 10 mm were randomized equally to tamsulosin (group A), naftopidil (group B) or watchful waiting (group C). Tamsulosin or naftopidil was given for a maximum of four weeks. In addition patients in group A and B were given 5 mg prednisolone once daily (maximum one week). Stone expulsion rate, time to stone expulsion, analgesic use, number of hospital visits for pain, follow-up and endoscopic treatment and adverse effects of drugs were noted. Statistical analyses were done using chi-square test, Mann-Whitney test and analysis of variance.

Results

There was a statistically higher expulsion rate in groups A (70%) and B (87.5%) as compared to group C (32.5%) (p<0.001). The expulsion rates were not statistically different between groups A and B (p=0.056). The mean time to expulsion was comparable between groups A and B but longer in group C. Analgesic use was significantly lower in groups A and B. Average number of hospital visits for pain, follow-up and endoscopic treatment was similar in all groups. There was no serious adverse event.

Conclusions

Medical expulsive therapy for the distal ureteric stones using either naftopidil or tamsulosin in combination with prednisolone is safe and efficacious.