Investig Clin Urol.  2018 Mar;59(2):112-118. 10.4111/icu.2018.59.2.112.

Predictive factors and treatment outcomes of Steinstrasse following shock wave lithotripsy for ureteral calculi: A Bayesian regression model analysis

• Kang HW
• Cho KS
• Ham WS
• Kang DH
• Jung HD
• Kwon JK
• Choi YD
• Lee JY

• KMID: 2404980
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2018.59.2.112

Abstract

PURPOSE
This study aims to assess the predictive factors and treatment outcomes of Steinstrasse formation following shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) for ureter stone.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The medical records of 1,418 ureter stone patients who underwent one-session SWL from November 2005 to May 2013 at our medical institute were retrospectively reviewed. Finally, 551 patients met inclusion criteria. Maximal length and location of stone, stone attenuation (Hounsfield units), and skin-to-stone distance (SSD) were determined on pretreatment non-contrast computed tomography.
RESULTS
Of 551 patients, 12 patients (2.2% of total cohort) developed Steinstrasse after one-session SWL. The Steinstrasse incidence was significantly associated with stone size, stone attenuation value, and SSD. Prophylactic ureter stenting was not a statistically significant predictor of Steinstrasse formation. After propensity-score matching, Steinstrasse group showed a significant shorter SSD compare to non-Steinstrasse group. Multivariate logistic regression and Bayesian analysis revealed that stone size, stone attenuation and SSD were significant predictor of Steinstrasse formation following SWL for ureter stone. The Steinstrasse resolved spontaneously in six patients and remaining six patients were treated by additional SWL. None of patients with Steinstrasse required ureteral stenting, percutaneous drainage, or consequent surgical intervention.
CONCLUSIONS
Steinstrasse formation following SWL for ureter stone was rare event but nonnegligible. Large stone size, high stone attenuation and short SSD were significant predictors of Steinstrasse formation following SWL for ureter stone. Majority of patients with Steinstrasse formation could be treated conservatively in this clinical scenario.

Keyword

Lithotripsy; Treatment outcome; Urinary calculi

MeSH Terms

Bayes Theorem
Drainage
Humans
Incidence
Lithotripsy*
Logistic Models
Medical Records
Retrospective Studies
Shock*
Silver Sulfadiazine
Stents
Treatment Outcome
Ureter*
Ureteral Calculi*
Urinary Calculi
Silver Sulfadiazine

Reference

1. Perks AE, Schuler TD, Lee J, Ghiculete D, Chung DG, D'A Honey RJ, et al. Stone attenuation and skin-to-stone distance on computed tomography predicts for stone fragmentation by shock wave lithotripsy. Urology. 2008; 72:765–769. PMID: 18674803.

2. Kang DH, Cho KS, Ham WS, Chung DY, Kwon JK, Choi YD, et al. Ureteral stenting can be a negative predictor for successful outcome following shock wave lithotripsy in patients with ureteral stones. Investig Clin Urol. 2016; 57:408–416.

3. El-Nahas AR, El-Assmy AM, Mansour O, Sheir KZ. A prospective multivariate analysis of factors predicting stone disintegration by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: the value of high-resolution noncontrast computed tomography. Eur Urol. 2007; 51:1688–1693. discussion 1693-4. PMID: 17161522.

4. Sulaiman MN, Buchholz NP, Clark PB. The role of ureteral stent placement in the prevention of Steinstrasse. J Endourol. 1999; 13:151–155. PMID: 10360492.

5. Chang KD, Lee JY, Park SY, Kang DH, Lee HH, Cho KS. Impact of pretreatment hydronephrosis on the success rate of shock wave lithotripsy in patients with ureteral stone. Yonsei Med J. 2017; 58:1000–1005. PMID: 28792145.

6. Madbouly K, Sheir KZ, Elsobky E, Eraky I, Kenawy M. Risk factors for the formation of a steinstrasse after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a statistical model. J Urol. 2002; 167:1239–1242. PMID: 11832705.

7. Moursy E, Gamal WM, Abuzeid A. Tamsulosin as an expulsive therapy for steinstrasse after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a randomized controlled study. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2010; 44:315–319. PMID: 20560802.

8. Cho KS, Jung HD, Ham WS, Chung DY, Kang YJ, Jang WS, et al. Optimal skin-to-stone distance is a positive predictor for successful outcomes in upper ureter calculi following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a Bayesian model averaging approach. PLoS One. 2015; 10:e0144912. PMID: 26659086.

9. Chung DY, Cho KS, Lee DH, Han JH, Kang DH, Jung HD, et al. Impact of colic pain as a significant factor for predicting the stone free rate of one-session shock wave lithotripsy for treating ureter stones: a Bayesian logistic regression model analysis. PLoS One. 2015; 10:e0123800. PMID: 25902059.

10. Rubin DB, Thomas N. Matching using estimated propensity scores: relating theory to practice. Biometrics. 1996; 52:249–264. PMID: 8934595.

11. Lee JY, Kim JH, Kang DH, Chung DY, Lee DH, Do Jung H, et al. Stone heterogeneity index as the standard deviation of Hounsfield units: a novel predictor for shock-wave lithotripsy outcomes in ureter calculi. Sci Rep. 2016; 6:23988. PMID: 27035621.

12. Hay KE, Barnes TS, Morton JM, Clements AC, Mahony TJ. Risk factors for bovine respiratory disease in Australian feedlot cattle: use of a causal diagram-informed approach to estimate effects of animal mixing and movements before feedlot entry. Prev Vet Med. 2014; 117:160–169. PMID: 25070491.

13. Kim IK, Lee JY, Kwon JK, Park JJ, Cho KS, Ham WS, et al. Prognostic factors for urachal cancer: a bayesian model-averaging approach. Korean J Urol. 2014; 55:574–580. PMID: 25237458.

14. Fedullo LM, Pollack HM, Banner MP, Amendola MA, Van Arsdalen KN. The development of steinstrassen after ESWL: frequency, natural history, and radiologic management. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1988; 151:1145–1147. PMID: 3263767.

15. Coptcoat MJ, Webb DR, Kellet MJ, Whitfield HN, Wickham JE. The steinstrasse: a legacy of extracorporeal lithotripsy? Eur Urol. 1988; 14:93–95. PMID: 3360043.

16. Onal B, Citgez S, Tansu N, Demirdag C, Dogan C, Gonul B, et al. Predictive factors and management of steinstrasse after shock wave lithotripsy in pediatric urolithiasis--a multivariate analysis study. Urology. 2012; 80:1127–1131. PMID: 22999455.

17. Gupta NP, Ansari MS, Kesarvani P, Kapoor A, Mukhopadhyay S. Role of computed tomography with no contrast medium enhancement in predicting the outcome of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for urinary calculi. BJU Int. 2005; 95:1285–1288. PMID: 15892818.

18. Wiesenthal JD, Ghiculete D, D'A Honey RJ, Pace KT. Evaluating the importance of mean stone density and skin-to-stone distance in predicting successful shock wave lithotripsy of renal and ureteric calculi. Urol Res. 2010; 38:307–313. PMID: 20625891.

19. Pareek G, Hedican SP, Lee FT Jr, Nakada SY. Shock wave lithotripsy success determined by skin-to-stone distance on computed tomography. Urology. 2005; 66:941–944. PMID: 16286099.

20. Choi JW, Song PH, Kim HT. Predictive factors of the outcome of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for ureteral stones. Korean J Urol. 2012; 53:424–430. PMID: 22741053.

21. Tanaka M, Yokota E, Toyonaga Y, Shimizu F, Ishii Y, Fujime M, et al. Stone attenuation value and cross-sectional area on computed tomography predict the success of shock wave lithotripsy. Korean J Urol. 2013; 54:454–459. PMID: 23878688.

22. Habib EI, Morsi HA, Elsheemy MS, Aboulela W, Eissa MA. Effect of size and site on the outcome of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy of proximal urinary stones in children. J Pediatr Urol. 2013; 9:323–327. PMID: 22695376.