Role of Hounsfield Unit in Predicting Outcomes of Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal Calculi: Outcomes of a Systematic Review

Current Urology Reports - 2023
Megha Garg1, Hans J. Johnson1, Su‐Min Lee1, Bhavan Prasad2, Bhaskar K. Somani3, Joe Philip1
1Bristol Urological Institute, North Bristol NHS Trust, West bury-on-Trym, Bristol, BS10 5NB, UK
2Freeman Hospital, Newcastle, UK
3University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK

Tóm tắt

Abstract Purpose of Review Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy success rates depend on several stone and patient-related factors, one of which is stone density which is calculated on computed tomography scan in Hounsfield Units. Studies have shown inverse correlation between SWL success and HU; however, there remains considerable variation between studies. We performed a systematic review regarding the use of HU in SWL for renal calculi to consolidate the current evidence and address current knowledge gaps. Recent Findings Database including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus were searched from inception through August 2022. Studies in English language analysing stone density/attenuation in adult patients undergoing SWL for renal calculi were included for assessment of Shockwave lithotripsy outcomes, use of stone attenuation to predict success, use of mean and peak stone density and Hounsfield unit density, determination of optimum cut-off values, nomograms/scoring systems, and assessment of stone heterogeneity. 28 studies with a total of 4,206 patients were included in this systematic review with sample size ranging from 30 to 385 patients. Male to female ratio was 1.8, with an average age of 46.3 years. Mean overall ESWL success was 66.5%. Stone size ranged from 4 to 30 mm in diameter. Mean stone density was used by two-third of the studies to predict the appropriate cut-off for SWL success, ranging from 750 to 1000 HU. Additional factors such as peak HU and stone heterogeneity index were also evaluated with variable results. Stone heterogeneity index was considered a better indicator for success in larger stones (cut-off value of 213) and predicting SWL stone clearance in one session. Prediction scores had been attempted, with researchers looking into combining stone density with other factors such as skin to stone distance, stone volume, and differing heterogeneity indices with variable results. Summary Numerous studies demonstrate a link between shockwave lithotripsy outcomes and stone density. Hounsfield unit < 750 has been found to be associated with shockwave lithotripsy success, with likelihood of failure strongly associated with values over 1000. Prospective standardisation of Hounsfield unit measurement and predictive algorithm for shockwave lithotripsy outcome should be considered to strengthen future evidence and help clinicians in the decision making. Trial Registration International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database: CRD42020224647

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Geraghty RM, Jones P, Herrmann TRW, Aboumarzouk O, Somani BK. Ureteroscopy is more cost effective than shock wave lithotripsy for stone treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Urol. 2018.

Turk C, Petrik A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M, et al. EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol. 2016;69(3):475–82.

Joe Philip, Megha Garg. Hounsfield unit and outcomes of shock wave lithotripsy for renal calculi. PROSPERO 2022 CRD42022315549. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022315549.

Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page M, et al. (editors). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.2. Cochrane. 2021.

The EndNote Team. EndNote X9. Philadelphia, PA: Clarivate; 2013. (EndNote).

Rayyan, Intelligent systematic review [Internet]. Available from: https://rayyan.ai/cite.

Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig L, et al. STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. BMJ [Internet]. BMJ; 2015;h5527. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D, The PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000097.

Waqas M, Saqib IU, Imran Jamil M, Ayaz Khan M, Akhter S. Evaluating the importance of different computed tomography scan-based factors in predicting the outcome of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for renal stones. Investig Clin Urol. 2018;59(1):25–31.

Yoshida S, Hayashi T, Ikeda J, Yoshinaga A, Ohno R, Ishii N, et al. Role of volume and attenuation value histogram of urinary stone on noncontrast helical computed tomography as predictor of fragility by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Urology. 2006;68(1):33–7.

El-Nahas AR, El-Assmy AM, Mansour O, Sheir KZ. A prospective multivariate analysis of factors predicting stone disintegration by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: the value of high-resolution noncontrast computed tomography. Eur Urol. 2007;51(6):1688–93; discussion 93–4.

Badran YA, Abdelaziz AS, Shehab MA, Mohamed HA, Emara AA, Elnabtity AM, et al. Is scoring system of computed tomography based metric parameters can accurately predicts shock wave lithotripsy stone-free rates and aid in the development of treatment strategies? Urol Ann. 2016;8(2):197–202.

Celik S, Bozkurt O, Kaya FG, Egriboyun S, Demir O, Secil M, et al. Evaluation of computed tomography findings for success prediction after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for urinary tract stone disease. Int Urol Nephrol. 2015;47(1):69–73.

Joseph P, Mandal AK, Singh SK, Mandal P, Sankhwar SN, Sharma SK. Computed tomography attenuation value of renal calculus: can it predict successful fragmentation of the calculus by extracoporeal shock wave lithotripsy? A preliminary study. J Urol. 2002;167(5):1968–71.

Pareek G, Hedican SP, Lee FT Jr, Nakada SY. Shock wave lithotripsy success determined by skin-to-stone distance on computed tomography. Urology. 2005;66(5):941–4.

Perks AE, Schuler TD, Lee J, Ghiculete D, Chung DG, RJ DAH, et al. Stone attenuation and skin-to-stone distance on computed tomography predicts for stone fragmentation by shock wave lithotripsy. Urology. 2008;72(4):765–9.

• Ichiyanagi O, Fukuhara H, Kurokawa M, Izumi T, Suzuki H, Naito S, et al. Reinforcement of the triple D score with simple addition of the intrarenal location for the prediction of the stone-free rate after shockwave lithotripsy for renal stones 10–20 mm in diameter. Int Urol Nephrol. 2019;51(2):239–45. This study validates the TrD score to help predict SWL success in 10-20 mm renal stones.

Patel T, Kozakowski K, Hruby G, Gupta M. Skin to stone distance is an independent predictor of stone-free status following shockwave lithotripsy. J Endourol. 2009;23(9):1383–5.

Azal Neto W, Reis LO, Pedro RN. Prediction of stone-free rates following extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in a contemporary cohort of patients with stone densities exceeding 1000 HU. Scandinavian J Urol. 2020;54(4):344–8.

Park HS, Gong MK, Yoon CY, du Moon G, Cheon J, Choi YD. Computed tomography-based novel prediction model for the outcome of shockwave lithotripsy in proximal ureteral stones. J Endourol. 2016;30(7):810–6.

Bandi G, Meiners RJ, Pickhardt PJ, Nakada SY. Stone measurement by volumetric three-dimensional computed tomography for predicting the outcome after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. BJU Int. 2009;103(4):524–8.

Lee JY, Kim JH, Kang DH, Chung DY, Lee DH, Do Jung H, et al. Stone heterogeneity index as the standard deviation of Hounsfield units: a novel predictor for shock-wave lithotripsy outcomes in ureter calculi. Sci Rep. 2016;6:23988.

Ben Khalifa B, Naouar S, Gazzah W, Salem B, El Kamel R. Predictive factors of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy success for urinary stones. Tunis Med J. 2016;94(5):397–400.

Geng J-H, Tu H-P, Shih PM-C, Shen J-T, Jang M-Y, Wu W-J, Li C-C, Chou Y-H, Juan Y-S. Noncontrast computed tomography can predict the outcome of shockwave lithotripsy via accurate stone measurement and abdominal fat distribution determination. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2015;31(1):34–41.

Ouzaid I, Al-qahtani S, Dominique S, Hupertan V, Fernandez P, Hermieu JF, et al. A 970 Hounsfield units (HU) threshold of kidney stone density on non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) improves patients' selection for extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL): evidence from a prospective study. BJU Int. 2012;110(11 Pt B):E438–42.

Gupta NP, Ansari MS, Kesarvani P, Kapoor A, Mukhopadhyay S. Role of computed tomography with no contrast medium enhancement in predicting the outcome of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for urinary calculi. BJU Int. 2005;95(9):1285–8.

Kaya C, Kaynak Y, Karabag A, Aykac A. The predictive role of abdominal fat parameters and stone density on SWL outcomes. Curr Med Imaging Rev. 2020;16(1):80–7.

Wang LJ, Wong YC, Chuang CK, Chu SH, Chen CS, See LC, et al. Predictions of outcomes of renal stones after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy from stone characteristics determined by unenhanced helical computed tomography: a multivariate analysis. Eur Radiol. 2005;15(11):2238–43.

Foda K, Abdeldaeim H, Youssif M, Assem A. Calculating the number of shock waves, expulsion time, and optimum stone parameters based on noncontrast computerized tomography characteristics. Urology. 2013;82(5):1026–31.

Shah K, Kurien A, Mishra S, Ganpule A, Muthu V, Sabnis RB, Desai M. Predicting effectiveness of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy by stone attenuation value. J Endourol. 2010;24(7):1169–73.

Massoud AM, Abdelbary AM, Al-Dessoukey AA, Moussa AS, Zayed AS, Mahmmoud O. The success of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy based on the stone-attenuation value from non-contrast computed tomography, Arab J Urol. 2014;12(2):155–161.

Abdelaziz H, Elabiad Y, Aderrouj I, Janane A, Ghadouane M, Ameur A, Abbar M. The usefulness of stone density and patient stoutness in predicting extracorporeal shock wave efficiency: results in a North African ethnic group. Can Urol Assoc J. 2014;8(7–8):e567–9.

Abdelhamid M, Mosharafa AA, Ibrahim H, Selim HM, Hamed M, Elghoneimy MN, Salem HK, Abdelazim MS, Badawy H. A prospective evaluation of high-resolution CT parameters in predicting extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy success for upper urinary tract calculi. J Endourol. 2016;30(11):1227–32.

• Iqbal N, Hasan A, Nazar A, Iqbal S, Hassan MH, Gill BS, Khan R, Akhter S, Ibarrola RS. Role of stone heterogeneity index in determining success of shock wave lithotripsy in urinary calculi. J Clin Transl Res. 2021;7(2):241–7. This study introduces the stone heterogeneity index which is a helpful CT scan based parameter that assess stone fragility to successfully predict SWL succes, more so single-session succes.

Wiesenthal JD, Ghiculete D, RJ DAH, Pace KT. Evaluating the importance of mean stone density and skin-to-stone distance in predicting successful shock wave lithotripsy of renal and ureteric calculi. Urol Res. 2010;38(4):307–13.

Weld KJ, Montiglio C, Morris MS, Bush AC, Cespedes RD. Shock wave lithotripsy success for renal stones based on patient and stone computed tomography characteristics. Urology. 2007;70(6):1043–6; discussion 6–7.

• Yamashita S, Kohjimoto Y, Iwahashi Y, Iguchi T, Iba A, Nishizawa S, et al. Three-dimensional mean stone density measurement is superior for predicting extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy success. Int J Urol. 2019;26(2):185–91. This study asesses the variation co-efficient of stone density as a marker of stone heterogeneity with stronger predictive power on SWL success in comparison with stone density.

Langenauer J, Betschart P, Hechelhammer L, Gusewell S, Schmid HP, Engeler DS, et al. Advanced non-contrasted computed tomography post-processing by CT-calculometry (CT-CM) outperforms established predictors for the outcome of shock wave lithotripsy. World J Urol. 2018;36(12):2073–80.

Tran TY, McGillen K, Cone EB, Pareek G. Triple D score is a reportable predictor of shockwave lithotripsy stone-free rates. J Endourol. 2015;29(2):226–30.

Yoshioka T, Ikenoue T, Hashimoto H, Otsuki H, Oeda T, Ishito N, et al. Development and validation of a prediction model for failed shockwave lithotripsy of upper urinary tract calculi using computed tomography information: the S3HoCKwave score. World J Urol. 2020;38(12):3267–73.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Current Urology Reports

Thông tin tác giả