Clinical Score Application for Abdominopelvic Computed Tomography Used in the Diagnosis of Renal Colic Patients

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background To develop risk scoring for the use of computed tomography (CT) imaging using the visual analog scale (VAS), physical examination, and laboratory findings of renal colic patients admitted to the emergency department (ED).

Materials and Methods This is prospective observational study. Among the patients who presented to the ED with abdominal or flank pain, patients who were scheduled for CT imaging for urolithiasis were included in the study. The mean VAS pain scores, physical examination findings, laboratory parameters, and macroscopic and microscopic values in urinalysis were compared between the two groups with and without stones on CT.

Results Of the 196 urolithiasis patients included in the study, 165 had ureteral stones, 76 had renal stones, and 45 had renal and ureteral stones. While the difference between the urine erythrocyte averages of the two groups was borderline significant (p = 0.04), there was a high difference between the urinary hemoglobin amounts (p < 0.001). In patients with urinary system stone disease, hydronephrosis, and ureteral dilatation, hemoglobin ++ and above were more significant (p < 0.001). For ureteral stones, pain intensity increased as the size increased (r = 0.34 p < 0.001). White blood cells > 10,000 10³/mL, and C-reactive protein (CRP) ≤ 5 mg/L were more significant in patients with acute renal colic.

Conclusions Although we cannot develop a clinical scoring system for renal colic patients, the meaningful results we found for urinary stone disease can be used in a newly developed scoring system. It can be used in new scoring systems in the ED using a high VAS score, presence and amount of urine hemoglobin, CRP) ≤ 5 mg/L, and creatinine value.

Authors' Contributions

All authors contributed to the manuscript's conception, data collection, analysis, drafting, and revising. They all accept responsibility for the contents of the study.

Compliance with Ethical Principles

The ethics committee approved this study of the Health Science University Antalya Training and Research Hospital (Ethics code: 2019–23/13). Informed consent was obtained from the patients.

Publication History

Article published online:
20 September 2022

© 2022. The Libyan Authority of Scientific Research and Technology and the Libyan Biotechnology Research Center. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

• References

• 1 Gourlay K, Splinter G, Hayward J, Innes G. Does pain severity predict stone characteristics or outcomes in emergency department patients with acute renal colic?. Am J Emerg Med 2021; 45: 37-41
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Picozzi SCM, Marenghi C. Casellato S, Ricci C, Gaeta M, Carmignani L. Management of ureteral calculi and expulsive medical therapy in emergency departments. J Emerg Trauma Shock 2011; 4: 70-76
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Golzari SE, Soleimanpour H, Rahmani F. et al. Therapeutic approaches for renal colic in the emergency department: a review article. Anesth Pain Med 2014; 4 (01) e16222
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Ahmed F, Askarpour MR, Eslahi A. et al. The role of ultrasonography in detecting urinary tract calculi compared to CT scan. Res Rep Urol 2018; 10: 199-203
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Uzun A, Korkut M, Kartal M, Bedel C. Evaluation of modified STONE score in patients presenting to the emergency department with flank pain. Urol Sci 2020; 31 (05) 221-225 DOI: 10.4103/UROS.UROS_32_20.
  CrossrefGoogle Scholar
• 6 Al-Terki A, El-Nahas AR, Abdelhamid U, Al-Ruwaished MA, Alanzi T, Al-Shaiji TF. Development and validation of a score for emergency intervention in patients with acute renal colic secondary to ureteric stones. Arab J Urol 2020; 18 (04) 236-240
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Doty E, DiGiacomo S, Gunn B, Westafer L, Schoenfeld E. What are the clinical effects of the different emergency department imaging options for suspected renal colic? A scoping review. J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open 2021; 2 (03) e12446 DOI: 10.1002/emp2.12446.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Cupisti A, Pasquali E, Lusso S, Carlino F, Orsitto E, Melandri R. Renal colic in Pisa emergency department: epidemiology, diagnostics and treatment patterns. Intern Emerg Med 2008; 3 (03) 241-244 DOI: 10.1007/s11739-008-0145-z.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Trinchieri A. Epidemiology of urolithiasis: an update. Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab 2008; 5 (02) 101-106
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Guru V, Dubinsky I. The patient vs. caregiver perception of acute pain in the emergency department. J Emerg Med 2000; 18 (01) 7-12 DOI: 10.1016/s0736-4679(99)00153-5.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Papa L, Stiell IG, Wells GA, Ball I, Battram E, Mahoney JE. Predicting intervention in renal colic patients after emergency department evaluation. CJEM 2005; 7 (02) 78-86 DOI: 10.1017/S1481803500013026.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Portis JL, Neises SM, Portis AJ. Pain is Independent of Stone Burden and Predicts Surgical Intervention in Patients with Ureteral Stones. J Urol 2018; Sep;200 (03) 597-603 DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2018.04.075. . Epub 2018 Apr 30. PMID: 29723569.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Gershan V, Homayounieh F, Singh R. et al. CT protocols and radiation doses for hematuria and urinary stones: comparing practices in 20 countries. Eur J Radiol 2020; 126: 108923 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.108923.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Pérez JA, Palmes MdeL, Ferrer JF, Urdangarain OO, Nuñez AB. Renal colic at emergency departments. Epidemiologic, diagnostic and etiopathogenic study. Arch Esp Urol 2010; 63 (03) 173-187
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Eskelinen M, Ikonen J, Lipponen P. Usefulness of history-taking, physical examination and diagnostic scoring in acute renal colic. Eur Urol 1998; 34 (06) 467-473 DOI: 10.1159/000019785.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Argyropoulos A, Farmakis A, Doumas K, Lykourinas M. The presence of microscopic hematuria detected by urine dipstick test in the evaluation of patients with renal colic. Urol Res 2004; 32 (04) 294-297 DOI: 10.1007/s00240-004-0413-y.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Memişoğulları R, Yıldırım HA, Orhan N, Yavuz Ö. Böbrek Biyopsisi Kadar Bilgi Veren Tetkik: Rutin İdrar Analizi. Duzce Medical Journal 2008; 10 (03) 77-84
  Google Scholar
• 18 Alelign T, Petros B. Kidney stone disease: an update on current concepts. Adv Urol 2018; 2018: 3068365 DOI: 10.1155/2018/3068365.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Bratt CG, Aurell M, Lindstedt G. Proximal tubular function in human hydronephrotic kidneys. J Urol 1981; 125 (01) 9-10
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Pak CY, Sakhaee K, Peterson RD, Poindexter JR, Frawley WH. Biochemical profile of idiopathic uric acid nephrolithiasis. Kidney Int 2001; 60 (02) 757-761 DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-1755.2001.060002757.x.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Sfoungaristos S, Kavouras A, Katafigiotis I, Perimenis P. Role of white blood cell and neutrophil counts in predicting spontaneous stone passage in patients with renal colic. BJU Int 2012; 110 (8 Pt B): E339-E345
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Song Y, Hernandez N, Gee MS, Noble VE, Eisner BH. Can ureteral stones cause pain without causing hydronephrosis?. World J Urol 2016; 34 (09) 1285-1288 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-015-1748-4.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Kim HY, Choe HS, Lee DS, Yoo JM, Lee SJ. Transient renal impairment in the absence of pre-existing chronic kidney disease in patients with unilateral ureteric stone impaction. Urolithiasis 2017; 45 (03) 249-254 DOI: 10.1007/s00240-016-0904-7.
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar