E-Locus - Institutional Repository of the University of Crete

Home Collections Type of Work Publications

Publications

Current Record: 1 of 29

[Add to Basket]

Identifier

https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13123461

Title

Recurrent urinary stone formers: imaging assessment and endoscopic treatment strategies: a systematic search and review

Author

Mavridis, Charalampos

Author

Bouchalakis, Athanasios

Author

Tsagkaraki, Vasiliki

Author

Somani, Bhaskar Kumar

Author

Mamoulakis, Charalampos

Author

Tokas, Theodoros

Publisher

MDPI: J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(12), 3461

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Nephrolithiasis is a heterogeneous disease with a high prevalence and recurrence rate. Although there has been much progress regarding the surgical treatment of stones, a standardized follow-up, especially in recurrent stone formers (SFs), has yet to be decided. This fact leads to the overuse of computed tomography (CT) scans and many reoperations in patients, thus increasing their morbidity and the financial burden on the health systems. This review systematically searched the literature for original articles regarding imaging strategies and endoscopic treatment for patients with recurrent urolithiasis, aiming to identify optimal strategies to deal with these patients. Methods: We systematically searched the Medline database (accessed on 1 April 2024) for articles regarding imaging modalities and endoscopic treatment for patients with recurrent urinary tract lithiasis. Results: No specific follow-up or endoscopic treatment strategy exists for patients with recurrent urolithiasis. CT scan was the imaging modality most used in the studies, followed by X-ray, ultrasonography, and digital tomosynthesis. A transparent algorithm could not be identified. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), and ureteroscopy (URS) were used in the studies for endoscopic treatment. PCNL showed the best stone-free (SFr) rate and lowest hazard ratio (HR) for reoperation. RIRS showed superiority over extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for recurrent SFs, but fragments over 4 mm increased the recurrent rate. URS has an increased HR for reoperation for bilateral stones. Conclusions: The heterogeneity of urolithiasis leaves urologists without a standardized plan for recurrent SFs. Thus, each patient’s follow-up should be planned individually and holistically. Pre-stenting is not to be avoided, especially in high-risk patients, and SFr status needs to be the aim. Finally, CT scans should not be generally overused but should be part of a patient’s treatment plan. Prospective studies are required to define SFr status, the size of significant residual fragments, and the modalities of intervention and follow-up.

Language

English

Subject

Kidney stones

Nephrolithiasis

PCNL

RIRS

Stone recurrence

URS

Urolithiasis

Issue date

2024-06-13