Is computed tomography-defined obstruction a predictor of urological intervention in emergency department patients presenting with renal colic?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.4143Abstract
Introduction: Our objective was to determine whether unilateral calculus-induced ureteric obstruction on computed tomography (CT) was independently associated with the need for urological intervention and 30-day return to the emergency department (ED).
Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with symptomatic urinary calculi diagnosed by unenhanced helical CT. Stepwise regression analysis was used to determine the predictors of urological intervention and 30-day return to the ED. Potential predictors assessed included: patient demographics, calculus size, calculus location, degree of obstruction, analgesic doses, signs and symptoms of infection, serum creatinine, cumulative intravenous fluid administered, and the prescription of medical expulsive therapy.
Results: Of 195 patients, 81 (41.5%) underwent urological intervention. The size of the calculus, its location, and the cumulative opioid dose were all independent predictors for urological intervention. Every 1 mm increase in calculus size increased the likelihood of intervention 2.2 times (odds ratio [OR] 2.17; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.67‒2.85). Proximal stones were 4.7 times more likely to require intervention than distal calculi (OR 0.21; 95% CI 0.09‒0.49). Every 10 mg increase in morphine was associated with a 30% increase in the odds of intervention (OR 1.30; 95% CI 1.07‒1.58). Degree of obstruction was not associated with the need for urological intervention. Finally, none of the variables were predictors for 30-day return to the ED.
Conclusions: Although stone size, proximal location, and severe pain, as indicated by higher opioid doses, were associated with the need for intervention, the degree of obstruction did not influence the management of patients with CT-defined urinary calculi.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:
- Post the Article on any Web site
- Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
- Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
- Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.
The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.
You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.
The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:
- That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
- That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
- That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
- That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.