The efficacy of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for symptomatic ureteral stones: Predictors of treatment failure without the assistance of computed tomography

Stone decision engine accurately predicts stone removal and treatment complications for shock wave lithotripsy and laser ureterorenoscopy patients

Kidney stones form when mineral salts crystallize in the urinary tract. While most stones exit the body in the urine stream, some can block the ureteropelvic junction or ureters, leading to severe lower back pain, blood in the urine, vomiting, and painful urination. Imaging technologies, such as X-rays or ureterorenoscopy (URS), are typically used to detect kidney stones. Subsequently, these stones are fragmented into smaller pieces using shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) or laser URS. Both treatments yield subtly different patient outcomes. To predict successful stone removal and complication outcomes, Artificial Neural Network models were trained on 15,126 SWL and 2,116 URS patient records. These records include patient metrics like Body Mass Index and age, as well as treatment outcomes obtained using various medical instruments and healthcare professionals. Due to the low number of outcome failures in the data (e.g., treatment complications), Nearest Neighbor and Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique (SMOTE) models were implemented to improve prediction accuracies. To reduce noise in the predictions, ensemble modeling was employed. The average prediction accuracies based on Confusion Matrices for SWL stone removal and treatment complications were 84.8% and 95.0%, respectively, while those for URS were 89.0% and 92.2%, respectively. The average prediction accuracies for SWL based on Area-Under-the-Curve were 74.7% and 62.9%, respectively, while those for URS were 77.2% and 78.9%, respectively. Taken together, the approach yielded moderate to high accurate predictions, regardless of treatment or outcome. These models were incorporated into a Stone Decision Engine web application (http://peteranoble.com/webapps.html) that suggests the best interventions to healthcare providers based on individual patient metrics.

Factors influencing the efficacy of ultrasound-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral stones: a retrospective study

The aim of the study was to analyze the factors influencing the efficacy of ultrasound-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the treatment of ureteral stones. The clinical data of 8102 patients (6083 men and 2019 women) who presented with ureteral stones were retrospectively analyzed. All the patients were treated with ultrasound-guided ESWL. The stone-free rate (SFR) was calculated to evaluate the effect of ESWL. The characteristics of the patients and their stones, and the ESWL parameters applied were compared to identify the factors affecting the treatment outcomes. The SFR and that following one ESWL session were 94.6% (7663/8102) and 75.4% (6107/8102), respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that stone location (OR 0.656, p < 0.001), stone size (OR 1.103, p < 0.001), and degree of hydronephrosis (OR 1.952, p < 0.001) independently affected SFR; and age (OR 1.005, p = 0.022), stone location (OR 0.729, p < 0.001), stone size (OR 1.103, p < 0.001), degree of hydronephrosis (OR 1.387, p = 0.001), maximum energy level(OR 0.691, p < 0.001) independently affected SFR following one session. Ultrasound-guided ESWL is effective in all levels of ureteral stones. Large stone size and moderate hydronephrosis are correlated with treatment failure. Ultrasound-guided ESWL may be the first choice for distal ureteral stones.

Reduction of pre-procedural anxiety for repeat sessions in extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) reduces pain intensity: A prospective observational study

Pain control is a major determinant for successful stone clearance in extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) for urolithiasis. Pain perception during ESWL may be influenced by patient factors like gender, age, body habitus and anxiety level, and stone related factors like size, laterality and location of stone. We investigated in general, the confounding patient and stone factors influencing pain perception during ESWL with importance given to procedural anxiety in first and the subsequent session of ESWL. This was a prospective observational study of all new consecutive patients who underwent ESWL for a period of 1 year at a tertiary Urological Centre. Demographic and stone anthropometry were analyzed. Pre-procedural anxiety was assessed prior to procedure using hospital anxiety and depression score (HADS) and pain was scored using numerical rating scale-11 at baseline, 30-minutes (i.e., during) and 24 hours after ESWL. Univariate and multivariate analysis for confounding factors included HADs were performed for pain perception. A P value < .05 was considered to be statistically significant. For the study duration, 119 patients were recruited and 72 of them returned for a second session. Procedural anxiety was the only independent factor affecting pain score in ESWL for the first session in multivariate analysis. A statistically significant reduction of mean procedural anxiety score from 6.7 ± 4.5 to 3.2 ± 2.7 (P < .05) for the second ESWL session was observed (n = 72). This was in conjunction with statistical reduction of mean pain score 30 minutes after ESWL from 5.2 ± 2.1 to 4.2 ± 2.1 (P < .05). Patients with HADS ≥ 8 had statistically significant higher mean pain score at all 3 intervals in the first ESWL session. This study has shown that pre-procedural anxiety mainly anticipatory, reduces and shows reduction in pain intensity among patients undergoing repeat ESWL. Hence, anxiety reducing methods should be explored in patients undergoing ESWL to avoid unnecessary analgesic use.