Author's Accepted Manuscript Evaluation and Comparison of Urolithiaisis Scoring Systems in Percutaneous Kidney Stone Surgery Kevin Labadie, Zhamshid Okhunov, Arash Akhavein, Daniel Moreira, Jorge Moreno-Palacios, Michael del Junco, Zeph Okeke, Vincent Bird, Arthur D. Smith, Jaime Landman PII: DOI: Reference:
S0022-5347(14)04142-1 10.1016/j.juro.2014.07.104 JURO 11679
To appear in: The Journal of Urology Accepted Date: 22 July 2014 Please cite this article as: Labadie K, Okhunov Z, Akhavein A, Moreira D, Moreno-Palacios J, del Junco M, Okeke Z, Bird V, Smith AD, Landman J, Evaluation and Comparison of Urolithiaisis Scoring Systems in Percutaneous Kidney Stone Surgery, The Journal of Urology® (2014), doi: 10.1016/ j.juro.2014.07.104. DISCLAIMER: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our subscribers we are providing this early version of the article. The paper will be copy edited and typeset, and proof will be reviewed before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to The Journal pertain. All press releases and the articles they feature are under strict embargo until uncorrected proof of the article becomes available online. We will provide journalists and editors with full-text copies of the articles in question prior to the embargo date so that stories can be adequately researched and written. The standard embargo time is 12:01 AM ET on that date.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
RI PT
EVALUATION AND COMPARISON OF UROLITHIAISIS SCORING SYSTEMS IN PERCUTANEOUS KIDNEY STONE SURGERY
Kevin Labadie1*, Zhamshid Okhunov1*, Arash Akhavein2, Daniel Moreira3, Jorge Moreno-Palacios1, Michael del Junco1, Zeph Okeke3, Vincent Bird2, Arthur D. Smith3 and Jaime Landman1
M AN U
SC
1. Department of Urology, University of California, Irvine 2. Department of Urology, University of Florida, Gainesville 3. Smith Institute for Urology, North Shore LIJ Health System
Corresponding Author:
TE D
*Co-first authors
AC C
EP
Jaime Landman, MD Professor of Urology and Radiology, Chairman, Department of Urology University of California, Irvine Email: [email protected] Tel: 714-456-3330 333 City Boulevard West, Suite 2100 Orange, CA 92868
Keywords: percutaneous nephrolithotomy, urolithiasis, scoring system, nomograms Abbreviations: percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), computerized tomography (CT), stone free status (SFS)
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Abstract Introduction: Contemporary predictive tools for PCNL outcomes include Guy’s Stone Score, S.T.O.N.E. Nephrolithometry, and CROES (Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society) nephrolithometric nomogram. We compared each scoring
RI PT
system using the same cohort to determine which was the most predictive of surgical outcomes.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent PCNL between 2009 and 2012 at three academic institutions. We calculated Guy’s Stone Score, S.T.O.N.E.
SC
Nephrolithometry, and CROES nephrolithometric nomogram based on preoperative computerized tomography (CT) images. A single observer at each institution reviewed
M AN U
all images and assigned scores. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to determine the most predictive scoring system.
Results: We enrolled 246 patients. Mean Guy’s Scores for patients who were stonefree versus who had residual stones were 2.2 and 2.7 respectively (p
S0022-5347(14)04142-1 10.1016/j.juro.2014.07.104 JURO 11679
To appear in: The Journal of Urology Accepted Date: 22 July 2014 Please cite this article as: Labadie K, Okhunov Z, Akhavein A, Moreira D, Moreno-Palacios J, del Junco M, Okeke Z, Bird V, Smith AD, Landman J, Evaluation and Comparison of Urolithiaisis Scoring Systems in Percutaneous Kidney Stone Surgery, The Journal of Urology® (2014), doi: 10.1016/ j.juro.2014.07.104. DISCLAIMER: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our subscribers we are providing this early version of the article. The paper will be copy edited and typeset, and proof will be reviewed before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to The Journal pertain. All press releases and the articles they feature are under strict embargo until uncorrected proof of the article becomes available online. We will provide journalists and editors with full-text copies of the articles in question prior to the embargo date so that stories can be adequately researched and written. The standard embargo time is 12:01 AM ET on that date.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
RI PT
EVALUATION AND COMPARISON OF UROLITHIAISIS SCORING SYSTEMS IN PERCUTANEOUS KIDNEY STONE SURGERY
Kevin Labadie1*, Zhamshid Okhunov1*, Arash Akhavein2, Daniel Moreira3, Jorge Moreno-Palacios1, Michael del Junco1, Zeph Okeke3, Vincent Bird2, Arthur D. Smith3 and Jaime Landman1
M AN U
SC
1. Department of Urology, University of California, Irvine 2. Department of Urology, University of Florida, Gainesville 3. Smith Institute for Urology, North Shore LIJ Health System
Corresponding Author:
TE D
*Co-first authors
AC C
EP
Jaime Landman, MD Professor of Urology and Radiology, Chairman, Department of Urology University of California, Irvine Email: [email protected] Tel: 714-456-3330 333 City Boulevard West, Suite 2100 Orange, CA 92868
Keywords: percutaneous nephrolithotomy, urolithiasis, scoring system, nomograms Abbreviations: percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), computerized tomography (CT), stone free status (SFS)
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Abstract Introduction: Contemporary predictive tools for PCNL outcomes include Guy’s Stone Score, S.T.O.N.E. Nephrolithometry, and CROES (Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society) nephrolithometric nomogram. We compared each scoring
RI PT
system using the same cohort to determine which was the most predictive of surgical outcomes.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent PCNL between 2009 and 2012 at three academic institutions. We calculated Guy’s Stone Score, S.T.O.N.E.
SC
Nephrolithometry, and CROES nephrolithometric nomogram based on preoperative computerized tomography (CT) images. A single observer at each institution reviewed
M AN U
all images and assigned scores. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to determine the most predictive scoring system.
Results: We enrolled 246 patients. Mean Guy’s Scores for patients who were stonefree versus who had residual stones were 2.2 and 2.7 respectively (p
