Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Urolithiasis 4/2016

01-08-2016 | Original Paper

Impaction of ureteral stones into the ureteral wall: Is it possible to predict?

Authors: Kemal Sarica, Bilal Eryildirim, Cahit Sahin, Kubilay Sabuncu, Cihangir Cetinel, Fehmi Narter

Published in: Urolithiasis | Issue 4/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

To determine the possible predictive value of certain acute phase reactants CRP and ESR as well as radiologic parameters on the degree of impaction in ureteral stones. A total of 80 adult patients with a single opaque proximal ureteral stone were evaluated. A non-contrast CT was performed in all cases and all possible radiologic predictive parameters calculated. Additionally, to outline the degree of impaction at the stone site, two serum acute phase reactants namely CRP and ESR levels were also assessed. Patients were divided into two groups as follows; Group 1 (n:42) patients with normal CRP levels and Group 2 (n:38) patients with elevated levels of CRP. The data obtained in the subgroups were first comparatively evaluated with radiological parameters and the possible correlation between CRP values and these parameters was well evaluated. While the serum CRP levels were normal in 42 cases, they were elevated in 38 cases. Evaluation of the data from CRP subgroups and radiologic parameters showed that elevated levels of serum CRP were closely related with mean values of ureteral wall thickness (UWT) as well as mean level of hydronephrosis with a statistically significant difference. Additionally, a correlation analysis between serum CRP levels and all other parameters mentioned above demonstrated a statistically significant correlation between UWT, degree of hydronephrosis and serum ESR values. Evaluation of serum CRP and ESR values could let us to predict the UWT, a parameter which is closely related with the degree of stone impaction.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Mugiya S, Ito T, Maruyama S et al (2004) Endoscopic features of impacted ureteral stones. J Urol 171:89–91CrossRefPubMed Mugiya S, Ito T, Maruyama S et al (2004) Endoscopic features of impacted ureteral stones. J Urol 171:89–91CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Deliveliotis C, Chrisofos M, Albanis S et al (2003) Management and follow-up of impacted ureteral stones. Urol Int 70:269–272CrossRefPubMed Deliveliotis C, Chrisofos M, Albanis S et al (2003) Management and follow-up of impacted ureteral stones. Urol Int 70:269–272CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Morgentaler A, Bridge SS, Dretler SP (1990) Management of the impacted ureteral calculus. J Urol 143:263–266PubMed Morgentaler A, Bridge SS, Dretler SP (1990) Management of the impacted ureteral calculus. J Urol 143:263–266PubMed
4.
go back to reference Elganainy E, Hameed DA, Elgammal MA et al (2009) Experience with impacted upper ureteral stones; should we abandon using semirigid ureteroscopes and pneumatic lithoclast? Int Arch Med 2:13CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Elganainy E, Hameed DA, Elgammal MA et al (2009) Experience with impacted upper ureteral stones; should we abandon using semirigid ureteroscopes and pneumatic lithoclast? Int Arch Med 2:13CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Seitz C, Tanovic E, Kikic Z et al (2007) Impact of stone size, location, composition, impaction, and hydronephrosis on the efficacy of holmium: YAG-laser ureterolithotripsy. Eur Urol 52:1751–1757CrossRefPubMed Seitz C, Tanovic E, Kikic Z et al (2007) Impact of stone size, location, composition, impaction, and hydronephrosis on the efficacy of holmium: YAG-laser ureterolithotripsy. Eur Urol 52:1751–1757CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Sarica K, Kafkasli A, Yazici O et al (2015) Ureteral wall thickness at the impacted ureteral stone site: a critical predictor for success rates after SWL. Urolithiasis 43:83–88CrossRefPubMed Sarica K, Kafkasli A, Yazici O et al (2015) Ureteral wall thickness at the impacted ureteral stone site: a critical predictor for success rates after SWL. Urolithiasis 43:83–88CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Kupelian V, Rosen RC, Roehrborn CG et al (2012) Association of overactive bladder and C-reactive protein levels. Results from the Boston Area Community Health (BACH) Survey. BJU Int 110:401–407CrossRefPubMed Kupelian V, Rosen RC, Roehrborn CG et al (2012) Association of overactive bladder and C-reactive protein levels. Results from the Boston Area Community Health (BACH) Survey. BJU Int 110:401–407CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Kupelian V, McVary KT, Barry MJ et al (2009) Association of C-reactive protein and lower urinary tract symptoms in men and women: results from Boston Area Community Health survey. Urology 73:950–957CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kupelian V, McVary KT, Barry MJ et al (2009) Association of C-reactive protein and lower urinary tract symptoms in men and women: results from Boston Area Community Health survey. Urology 73:950–957CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
go back to reference Tanaka N, Kikuchi E, Shirotake S et al (2014) The predictive value of C-reactive protein for prognosis in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma treated with radical nephroureterectomy: a multi-institutional study. Eur Urol 65:227–234CrossRefPubMed Tanaka N, Kikuchi E, Shirotake S et al (2014) The predictive value of C-reactive protein for prognosis in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma treated with radical nephroureterectomy: a multi-institutional study. Eur Urol 65:227–234CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Sun X, Xia S, Lu J et al (2008) Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: randomized comparison of percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy. J Endourol 22:913–917CrossRefPubMed Sun X, Xia S, Lu J et al (2008) Treatment of large impacted proximal ureteral stones: randomized comparison of percutaneous antegrade ureterolithotripsy versus retrograde ureterolithotripsy. J Endourol 22:913–917CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Juan YS, Shen JT, Li CC et al (2008) Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the management of impacted, large, proximal ureteral stones. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 24:204–209CrossRefPubMed Juan YS, Shen JT, Li CC et al (2008) Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the management of impacted, large, proximal ureteral stones. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 24:204–209CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Manohar T, Ganpule A, Desai M (2008) Comparative evaluation of Swiss Litho Clast 2 and holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy for impacted upper ureteral stones. J Endourol 22:443–446CrossRefPubMed Manohar T, Ganpule A, Desai M (2008) Comparative evaluation of Swiss Litho Clast 2 and holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy for impacted upper ureteral stones. J Endourol 22:443–446CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Leijte JA, Oddens JR, Lock TM (2008) Holmium laser lithotripsy for ureteral calculi: predictive factors for complications and success. J Endourol 22:257–260CrossRefPubMed Leijte JA, Oddens JR, Lock TM (2008) Holmium laser lithotripsy for ureteral calculi: predictive factors for complications and success. J Endourol 22:257–260CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Wolf JS Jr (2007) Treatment selection and outcomes: ureteral calculi. Urol Clin N Am 34:421–430CrossRef Wolf JS Jr (2007) Treatment selection and outcomes: ureteral calculi. Urol Clin N Am 34:421–430CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Sahin C, Eryildirim B, Kafkaslı A et al (2015) Predictive parameters for medical expulsive therapy in ureteral stones: a critical evaluation. Urolithiasis 43:271–273CrossRefPubMed Sahin C, Eryildirim B, Kafkaslı A et al (2015) Predictive parameters for medical expulsive therapy in ureteral stones: a critical evaluation. Urolithiasis 43:271–273CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Impaction of ureteral stones into the ureteral wall: Is it possible to predict?
Authors
Kemal Sarica
Bilal Eryildirim
Cahit Sahin
Kubilay Sabuncu
Cihangir Cetinel
Fehmi Narter
Publication date
01-08-2016
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Urolithiasis / Issue 4/2016
Print ISSN: 2194-7228
Electronic ISSN: 2194-7236
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-015-0850-9

Other articles of this Issue 4/2016

Urolithiasis 4/2016 Go to the issue