Triple D Score Is a Reportable Predictor of Shockwave Lithotripsy Stone-Free Rates
- 1 February 2015
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Mary Ann Liebert Inc in Journal of Endourology
- Vol. 29 (2), 226-230
- https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2014.0212
Abstract
Over the last decade, shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) success rates have been correlated with stone density, skin-to-stone distance (SSD), and stone diameter. However, time constraints and the technical challenge of manual measurement often preclude utilization of these parameters. In this study, we describe a scoring system that accurately predicts SWL stone-free rates, is simple to calculate, and can be easily included in the radiology report. Two hundred thirty-five patients who underwent SWL from 2011 to 2014 were evaluated. One hundred thirty-three had available preoperative imaging. Stone density, SSD, ellipsoid stone volume (ESV), and stone-free rates were determined. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to determine cutoff values for each parameter. The Triple D Score was calculated based upon the number of cutoff values a stone fell below. One hundred forty of the 235 patients (59.5%) who underwent SWL were stone free after single-session treatment. Seventy-six of the 133 (57.1%) patients with available preoperative imaging were stone free. ESV, SSD, and stone density were significant predictors of SWL success. Based upon the ROC curves, cutoffs of <150 μL for ESV, <12 cm for SSD, and <600 HU for stone density were established. A Triple D Score of 0, 1, 2, and 3 correlated with SWL success rates of 21.4%, 41.3%, 78.7%, and 96.1%, respectively. Readily available predictive tools are necessary to enhance SWL cost-effectiveness. The Triple D Score is simple to calculate and can be reported by radiologists. Incorporation of the Triple D Score into preoperative planning may increase the overall SWL success rates.Keywords
This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:
- Shockwave Lithotripsy–New Concepts and Optimizing Treatment ParametersUrologic Clinics of North America, 2013
- Evaluation of a synchronous twin‐pulse technique for shock wave lithotripsy: a prospective randomized study of effectiveness and safety in comparison to standard single‐pulse techniqueBJU International, 2007
- Independent assessment of a wide‐focus, low‐pressure electromagnetic lithotripter: absence of renal bioeffects in the pigBJU International, 2007
- Air Pockets Trapped During Routine Coupling in Dry Head Lithotripsy Can Significantly Decrease the Delivery of Shock Wave EnergyJournal of Urology, 2006
- Shock wave lithotripsy success determined by skin-to-stone distance on computed tomographyUrology, 2005
- 22nd World Congress on Endourology and SWL 20th Basic Research SymposiumJournal of Endourology, 2004
- Effect of Stone Motion on in Vitro Comminution Efficiency of Storz Modulith SLXJournal of Endourology, 2004
- PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED TRIAL COMPARING SHOCK WAVE LITHOTRIPSY AND URETEROSCOPY FOR MANAGEMENT OF DISTAL URETERAL CALCULIJournal of Urology, 2001
- IMAGE BASED RENAL STONE TRACKING TO IMPROVE EFFICACY IN EXTRACORPOREAL LITHOTRIPSYJournal of Urology, 1998
- Cost-Effectiveness v Patient Preference in the Choice of Treatment for Distal Ureteral Calculi: A Literature-Based Decision AnalysisJournal of Endourology, 1995