Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of CROES, S.T.O.N.E, and Guy’s scoring systems for the prediction of stone-free status and complication rates following percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with chronic kidney disease

  • Urology - Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate and compare the accuracy of S.T.O.N.E, Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society (CROES), and Guy’s stone score in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) following percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL).

Methods

The charts of patients who had undergone a prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy from June 2006 to June 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients accepted as stage 3 and higher according to chronic kidney disease epidemiology collaboration formula, were enrolled into the study. Calculation of the CROES, S.T.O.N.E, and Guy’s scoring system (SS) was made as defined in original papers. Patients were categorized into four scores according to CROES, into nine scores according to S.T.O.N.E, and into four scores according to Guy’s SS.

Results

A total of 303 patients fulfilled the study inclusion criteria. The mean preoperative eGFR and creatinine levels were 47 mL/min and 1.55 mg/dL, respectively. In patients who were stone free and those with residual stones, the mean CROES SS was 179 and 137 (p < 0.001), the mean S.T.O.N.E score was 8.8 and 9.9 (p < 0.001), and the mean Guy’s SS was 1.8 and 2.4 (p < 0.001), respectively. Multivariate regression analysis revealed CROES SS was the only scoring system, which had a predictive value for PNL outcome in patients with CKD (p = 0.011) and any of three SS were not useful for predicting PNL complications in patients with CKD.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated the CROES SS was the only independent factor in the prediction of PNL outcome in CKD patients. Furthermore, three of the NSSs were not useful for predicting PNL complications in patients with CKD.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Türk C, Knoll T, Petrik A et al (2015) European association of urology, guidelines on urolithiasis. Eur Urol 69:468

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kuzgunbay B, Turunc T, Yaycioglu O et al (2011) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for staghorn kidney stones in elderly patients. Int Urol Nephrol 43:639–643

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Levey AS, Coresh J, Balk E et al (2003) National Kidney Foundation practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Ann Intern Med 139:137–147

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fox CS, Matsushita K, Woodward M et al (2012) Associations of kidney disease measures with mortality and end-stage renal disease in individuals with and without diabetes: a meta-analysis. Lancet 380:1662–1673

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Smith A, Averch TD, Shahrour K et al (2013) A nephrolithometric nomogram to predict treatment success of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Urol 190:149–156

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Okhunov Z, Friedlander JI, George AK et al (2013) STONE nephrolithometry: novel surgical classification system for kidney calculi. Urology 81:1154–1159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Thomas K, Smith NC, Hegarty N, Glass JM (2011) The Guy’s stone score—grading the complexity of percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures. Urology 78:277–281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. National Kidney Foundation (2013) Estimated glomerular filtration rate formula developed by Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI). http://www.kidney.org/professionals/kdoqi/gfr_calculator. Accessed 7 Nov 2013

  9. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Jungers P, Joly D, Barbey F, Choukroun G, Daudon M (2004) ESRD caused by nephrolithiasis: prevalence, mechanisms, and prevention. Am J Kidney Dis 44:799–805

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gupta M, Bolton DM, Gupta PN, Stoller ML (1994) Improved renal function following aggressive treatment of urolithiasis and concurrent mild to moderate renal insufficiency. J Urol 152:1086–1090

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lukaszyk E, Lukaszyk M, Koc-Zorawska E, Bodzenta-Lukaszyk A, Malyszko J (2016) GDF-15, iron, and inflammation in early chronic kidney disease among elderly patients. Int Urol Nephrol 48:839–844

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Cader RA, Ibrahim OA, Paul S, Gafor HA, Mohd R (2014) Left ventricular hypertrophy and chronic fluid overload in peritoneal dialysis patients. Int Urol Nephrol 46:1209–1215

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sfoungaristos S, Gofrit ON, Yutkin V, Landau EH, Pode D, Duvdevani M (2016) External validation of CROES nephrolithometry as a preoperative predictive system for percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes. J Urol 195:372–376

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Akhavein A, Henriksen C, Syed J, Bird VG (2015) Prediction of single procedure success rate using S.T.O.N.E nephrolithometry surgical classification system with strict criteria for surgical outcome. Urology 85:69–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mandal S, Goel A, Kathpalia R et al (2012) Prospective evaluation of complications using the modified Clavien grading system, and of success rates of percutaneous nephrolithotomy using Guy’s Stone Score: a single-center experience. Indian J Urol 28:392–398

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Labadie K, Okhunov Z, Akhavein A et al (2015) Evaluation and comparison of urolithiasis scoring systems used in percutaneous kidney stone surgery. J Urol 193:154–159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tailly TO, Okhunov Z, Nadeau BR et al (2016) Multicenter external validation and comparison of stone scoring systems in predicting outcomes after percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Endourol 30:594–601

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sfoungaristos S, Gofrit ON, Pode D, Landau EH, Duvdevani M (2016) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for staghorn stones: which nomogram can better predict postoperative outcomes? World J Urol 34:1163–1168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Choi SW, Bae WJ, Ha US et al (2017) Prediction of stone-free status and complication rates after tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a comparative and retrospective study using three stone-scoring systems and preoperative parameters. World J Urol 35:449–457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yarimoglu S, Polat S, Bozkurt IH et al (2016) Comparison of S.T.O.N.E and CROES nephrolithometry scoring systems for predicting stone-free status and complication rates after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a single center study with 262 cases. Urolithiasis. doi:10.1007/s00240-016-0935-0

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kumar S, Sreenivas J, Karthikeyan VS, Mallya A, Keshavamurthy R (2016) Evaluation of CROES nephrolithometry nomogram as a preoperative predictive system for percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes. J Endourol 30:1079–1083

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Haseki Teaching and Research Hospital, Millet Street, Fatih, Istanbul, Turkey

    Fatih Yanaral, Faruk Ozgor, Metin Savun, Murat Sahan, Omer Sarilar & Murat Binbay

Authors
  1. Fatih Yanaral
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Faruk Ozgor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Metin Savun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Murat Sahan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Omer Sarilar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Murat Binbay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fatih Yanaral.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Ethical standards

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yanaral, F., Ozgor, F., Savun, M. et al. Comparison of CROES, S.T.O.N.E, and Guy’s scoring systems for the prediction of stone-free status and complication rates following percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with chronic kidney disease. Int Urol Nephrol 49, 1569–1575 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-017-1631-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-017-1631-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation