Feasibility analysis for predicting spontaneous passage of ureteral calculi based on CT
-
摘要: 目的 分析预测输尿管结石自发排出的CT特征因素。方法 回顾性分析2019年12月-2021年12月在浙江医院检查和治疗的115例输尿管结石病例。所有患者初诊均行腹部CT检查并行三维重建, 收集输尿管结石位置、结石体积、结石CT值、结石部位输尿管壁厚度和肾积水分级。按照治疗结果不同, 将患者分为自发排出(spontaneous passage, SP)组和非自发排出(no-spontaneous passage, No-SP)组。计数资料比较采用χ2检验。计量资料比较采用Mann-Whitney U检验。单因素分析差异有统计学意义的上述CT特征进行logistic回归分析, 筛选出输尿管结石自发排出的预测因素。通过ROC曲线检验模型的预测效果。结果 CT共检出输尿管结石115例。其中SP组73例, 男59例, 女14例, 中位年龄37.00岁; No-SP组42例, 男31例, 女11例, 中位年龄43.50岁; 2组性别和年龄比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。2组结石位置、肾积水分级比较差异有统计学意义(χ2=8.34、32.74;P < 0.05)。输尿管盆段-膀胱壁内段结石(77%)比腹段结石(51%)自发排出率高。0~2级肾积水结石(83%)比3~4级肾结石(30%)自发排出率明显增高。SP组结石体积、结石CT值、结石部位输尿管壁厚度中位数分别为0.07 cm3、562 HU、0.14 cm; No-SP组结石体积、结石CT值、结石部位输尿管壁厚度中位数分别为0.39 cm3、947 HU、0.21 cm。2组比较差异有统计学意义(Z=-7.10、-5.38、-3.39;P < 0.05)。结石体积、结石CT值、结石部位输尿管壁厚度的AUC分别为0.90、0.80、0.69, 最佳诊断临界值分别为0.08 cm3、802.5 HU、0.11 cm。Logistic回归分析显示结石体积(OR=0.02, 95%CI: 0.00~0.47)和肾积水分级(OR=0.22, 95%CI: 0.08~0.62)是结石自发排出的独立预测因素(P < 0.05)。该模型的准确度为80.90%, 灵敏度为91.80%, 特异度为61.90%, 阳性预测值为80.72%, 阴性预测值为81.25%。ROC曲线显示该模型预测效果好(AUC=0.91)。结论 输尿管结石位置、结石体积、结石CT值、结石部位输尿管壁厚度及肾积水分级是结石自发排出的影响因素。结石体积和肾积水分级为独立预测因素。这为输尿管结石的治疗提供有价值的影像学信息。Abstract: Objective To analyze the CT characteristic factors for predicting spontaneous passage of ureteral calculi.Methods A retrospective analysis was performed on 115 cases of ureteral calculi examined and treated in Zhejiang Hospital from December 2019 to December 2021. All patients underwent abdominal CT examination and 3D reconstruction at initial diagnosis. The location, volume, CT value of ureteral calculi, ureteral wall thickness at the calculi site and hydronephrosis grade were measured in the post-processing workstation. According to different therapeutic results, patients were divided into SP and No-SP groups. The chi-square test was used to compare the count data. Measurement data were compared by Mann-Whitney U test. Logistic regression analysis was performed to screen out the predictive factors of spontaneous passage of ureteral calculi. The prediction effect of the model was tested by ROC curve.Results A total of 115 cases of ureteral calculi were detected by CT. Seventy-three cases in SP group (59 males, 14 females; Median age: 37 years) and 42 cases in No-SP group (31 males, 11 females; Median age 43.50 years) were discovered, and there were no significant differences in gender or age between the two groups (P>0.05). There were significant differences in location of of ureteral calculi and hydronephrosis grade between the two groups (χ2=8.34, 32.74, P < 0.05). The spontaneous passage rate of pelvic and intramural segment of bladder calculi (77%) was higher than that of abdominal segment calculi (51%). The spontaneous passage rate of grade 0-2 hydronephrosis stones (83%) was significantly higher than that of grade 3-4 hydronephrosis stones (30%). In SP group, the median calculi volume, calculi CT value and ureteral wall thickness were 0.07 cm3, 562 HU and 0.14 cm, respectively. In No-SP group, the median calculi volume, calculi CT value and ureteral wall thickness at calculi site were 0.39 cm3, 947 HU and 0.21 cm, respectively. There were significant differences between the two groups (Z=-7.10, -5.38, -3.39, P < 0.05). The AUC were 0.90, 0.80 and 0.69, and the cutoff value were 0.08 cm3, 802.5 HU and 0.11 cm, respectively. Logistic regression analysis showed that volume of ureteral calculi (OR=0.02, 95%CI: 0.00-0.47) and hydronephrosis grade (OR=0.22, 95%CI: 0.08-0.62) were independent predictors of spontaneous passage of stone (P < 0.05). The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were 80.90%, 91.80%, 61.90%, 80.72% and 81.25%, respectively. ROC curve showed that the model had a good predictive effect (AUC=0.91).Conclusion Location, volume, CT value of calculi, ureteral wall thickness at stone site and hydronephrosis grade based on CT were the influencing factors of spontaneous passage of ureteral calculi. Volume of ureteral calculi and hydronephrosis grade were independent predictors. These provide valuable imaging information for the treatment of ureteral calculi.
-
Key words:
- ureteral calculi /
- computed tomography /
- feature analysis
-
-
表 1 SP组与No-SP组患者特征及输尿管结石CT影像特征分析结果
例，M(Q1，Q3) 项目 No-SP组(42例) SP组(73例) 总计(115例) χ2/Z P值 性别 0.77 0.380 男 31 59 90 女 11 14 25 年龄/岁 43.5(31.0，53.0) 37(29.5，49.5) -1.58 0.110 结石位置 8.34 < 0.001 腹段 29 30 59 盆段-膀胱壁内段 13 43 56 结石体积/cm3 0.39(0.20，0.64) 0.07(0.04，0.14) -7.10 < 0.001 结石CT值/HU 947.00(787.00，1208.25) 562.00(389.50，863.50) -5.38 < 0.001 结石部位输尿管壁厚度/cm 0.21(0.13，0.35) 0.14(0.08，0.23) -3.39 < 0.001 肾积水分级 32.74 < 0.001 0~2级 12 60 72 3~4级 30 13 43 
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] Selvi I, Baydilli N, Tokmak TT, et al. CT-related parameters and Framingham score as predictors of spontaneous passage of ureteral stones≤10 mm: results from a prospective, observational, multicenter study[J]. Urolithiasis, 2021, 49(3): 227-237. doi: 10.1007/s00240-020-01214-6
[2] 梁志强, 江东, 伍世杰, 等. CT造影在输尿管末端小结石分类治疗方法选择中的价值[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2016, 10(4): 267-270.
[3] Mishra AK, Kumar S, Dorairajan LN, et al. Study of ureteral and renal morphometry on the outcome of ureterorenoscopic lithotripsy: The critical role of maximum ureteral wall thickness at the site of ureteral stone impaction[J]. Urol Ann, 2020, 12(3): 212-219. doi: 10.4103/UA.UA_95_19
[4] de Bessa J Jr, Rodrigues CM, Chammas MC, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of Onen's Alternative Grading System combined with Doppler evaluation of ureteral jets as an alternative in the diagnosis of obstructive hydronephrosis in children[J]. PeerJ, 2018, 6: e4791. doi: 10.7717/peerj.4791
[5] Tran TY, Bamberger JN, Blum KA, et al. Predicting the Impacted Ureteral Stone with Computed Tomography[J]. Urology, 2019, 130: 43-47. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2019.04.020
[6] Cheng RZ, Shkolyar E, Chang TC, et al. Ultra-Low-Dose CT: An Effective Follow-Up Imaging Modality for Ureterolithiasis[J]. J Endourol, 2020, 34(2): 139-144. doi: 10.1089/end.2019.0574
[7] 刘玉峰, 张会杰, 陈海平, 等. 输尿管壁厚度预测肾绞痛后输尿管结石自行排出的可能性研究[J]. 临床泌尿外科杂志, 2022, 37(3): 172-174, 179. https://lcmw.chinajournal.net.cn/WKC/WebPublication/paperDigest.aspx?paperID=dd9f7522-f55f-4dc6-aad1-883da18851a2
[8] 杨彤威, 李原学, 张鑫, 等. 术前CT测量输尿管壁最大厚度预测输尿管嵌顿性结石及镜下钬激光碎石疗效的价值[J]. 中国医师杂志, 2022, 24(5): 780-783. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn431274-20210804-00844
[9] Daly KF, Horan MT, Lincoln MC, et al. Predictors of Stone-Related Events in Asymptomatic Untreated Intrarenal Calculi[J]. J Endourol, 2022, 36(4): 444-447. doi: 10.1089/end.2021.0736
[10] 赵书晓, 李峰, 覃智标, 等. 泌尿系CT定量分析对输尿管结石嵌顿的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 15(2): 126-129.
[11] Yoshida T, Inoue T, Taguchi M, et al. Ureteral wall thickness as a significant factor in predicting spontaneous passage of ureteral stones of ≤10 mm: a preliminary report[J]. World J Urol, 2019, 37(5): 913-919. doi: 10.1007/s00345-018-2461-x
[12] 王蕊, 毛崇文, 李松, 等. CT三维纹理分析对输尿管结石激光碎石术疗效的预测[J]. 国际医学放射学杂志, 2020, 43(3): 288-293. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GWLC202003010.htm
[13] Zorba OV, Ogullar S, Yazar S, et al. CT-Based Determination of Ureteral Stone Volume: A Predictor of Spontaneous Passage[J]. J Endourol, 2016, 30(1): 32-36. doi: 10.1089/end.2015.0481
[14] 刘斯平, 邹月芬, 李德龙, 等. MSCT测量肾输尿管结石MSD及SSD预测ESWL疗效[J]. 南京医科大学学报(自然科学版), 2015, 35(6): 888-890, 898. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NJYK201506031.htm
[15] 张艳, 宣枫, 卫冰冰. 基于CT检查的输尿管结石相关参数预测ESWL疗效的临床价值[J]. 国际泌尿系统杂志, 2022, 42(2): 250-253.
[16] Chandhoke R, Bamberger JN, Gallante B, et al. Peri-Calculus Ureteral Thickness on Computed Tomography Predicts Stone Impaction at Time of Surgery: A Prospective Study[J]. J Endourol, 2020, 34(1): 107-111. doi: 10.1089/end.2019.0449
-
图(2)
表(1)
计量
- 文章访问数: 655
- PDF下载数: 183
- 施引文献: 0