metricas
Actas Urológicas Españolas (English Edition) Comparison of different encrustation severity scores for residual stone fragment...
Journal Information
Cite
Cite
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Visits
273
Original article
Available online 24 July 2026

Comparison of different encrustation severity scores for residual stone fragments after encrusted double J stent removal

Comparación de diferentes sistemas de clasificación de la incrustación del catéter doble J para predecir fragmentos litiásicos residuales tras su retirada
Visits
273
Serdar Basbogaa,1, Ahmet Burak Yilmazb,1, Kamal Karimzadac, Ali Yasin Ozercand, Tanju Ketenc, Ozer Guzelc,e, Altug Tuncelc,e,
Corresponding author
tuncelaltug@yahoo.com

Corresponding author.
a Department of Urology, Ministry of Health, Gulhane Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
b Department of Urology, Ministry of Health, Sincan Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
c Department of Urology, University of Health Sciences, Bilkent City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
d Department of Urology, Ministry of Health, Kayseri City Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey
e Department of Urology, Ankara Guven Hospital, Section for Advanced Minimally Invasive & Robotic Surgery, Ankara, Turkey
This item has received
Article information
Abstract
Full Text
Bibliography
Download PDF
Statistics
Abstract
Objective

To evaluate the association between commonly used encrustation severity scoring systems and residual stone fragments following encrusted double-J stent removal.

Materials and methods

Between January 2019 and January 2023, 1572 patients who underwent surgery for urolithiasis were retrospectively reviewed. Fifty-eight patients (3.6%) with encrusted double-J stents met the inclusion criteria. Patients were categorized into two groups based on non-contrast computed tomography findings four to six weeks after double-J stent removal: residual stone fragments (>3 mm) (n = 7) and stone-free status (n = 51). Encrustation severity was assessed using the Forgotten–Encrusted–Calcified (FECal) classification, Kidney–Ureter–Bladder (KUB) score, Visual Grading for Ureteral Encrusted Stent (V-GUES) system, and Encrustation Burden Score (EBS). Clinical variables and operative outcomes were compared, and predictors of residual fragments were analyzed using logistic regression analyses.

Results

Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable between groups (all p > 0.05). Patients with residual fragments had significantly higher encrustation burden (p = 0.022) and longer operative duration (p = 0.034). V-GUES and EBS were significantly higher in the residual group (p < 0.001 and p = 0.022, respectively), whereas FECal and KUB scores did not differ significantly between groups. In univariate analysis, both V-GUES score (OR: 3.299, p = 0.019) and EBS (OR: 1.006, p = 0.032) were associated with residual stone fragments. However, no variable remained statistically significant in multivariate analysis, likely due to the limited number of residual stone events.

Conclusion

V-GUES score and EBS differed significantly between groups. Although both were associated with residual fragments in univariate analyses, these associations did not remain in multivariate models.

Keywords:
Encrusted ureteral stents
Encrustation severity scores
Residual stone
Endourology
Resumen
Objetivo

Evaluar la asociación entre los sistemas de clasificación de la incrustación más utilizados y la presencia de fragmentos litiásicos residuales tras la retirada de un catéter doble J incrustado.

Materiales y métodos

Entre enero de 2019 y enero de 2023 se revisaron retrospectivamente 1572 pacientes sometidos a cirugía por urolitiasis. Cincuenta y ocho pacientes (3,6%) con catéter doble J incrustado cumplieron los criterios de inclusión. Los pacientes se dividieron en dos grupos según los hallazgos en la tomografía computarizada sin contraste realizada entre cuatro y seis semanas después de la retirada del catéter doble J: grupo con litiasis residual (>3 mm) (n = 7) y grupo libre de litiasis (n = 51). La severidad de la incrustación se evaluó mediante la clasificación Forgotten–Encrusted–Calcified (FECal), la puntuación Kidney–Ureter–Bladder (KUB), el sistema Visual Grading for Ureteral Encrusted Stent (V-GUES) y el Encrustation Burden Score (EBS). Se compararon las variables clínicas y los resultados operatorios, y los predictores de fragmentos residuales se analizaron mediante regresión logística.

Resultados

Las características demográficas y clínicas basales fueron comparables entre los grupos (todos p > 0,05). Los pacientes con fragmentos litiásicos residuales presentaron una mayor severidad de la incrustación (p = 0,022) y un tiempo quirúrgico más prolongado (p = 0,034). Las puntuaciones V-GUES y EBS fueron significativamente más altas en el grupo con fragmentos residuales (p < 0,001 y p = 0,022, respectivamente), mientras que las puntuaciones FECal y KUB no mostraron diferencias significativas entre los grupos. En el análisis univariable, tanto la puntuación V-GUES (OR: 3,299; p = 0,019) como el EBS (OR: 1,006; p = 0,032) se asociaron con fragmentos litiásicos residuales. Sin embargo, ninguna variable mantuvo significación estadística en el análisis multivariable, probablemente debido al número limitado de casos con fragmentos residuales.

Conclusión

Las puntuaciones V-GUES y EBS fueron significativamente más elevadas en el grupo con fragmentos residuales. Aunque ambas se asociaron con fragmentos litiásicos residuales en los análisis univariables, estas asociaciones no se mantuvieron en los modelos multivariables.

Palabras clave:
Catéter ureteral incrustado
Sistemas puntuación de severidad de incrustación
Litiasis residual
Endourología

Article

These are the options to access the full texts of the publication Actas Urológicas Españolas (English Edition)
Subscriber
Subscriber

If you already have your login data, please click here .

If you have forgotten your password you can you can recover it by clicking here and selecting the option “I have forgotten my password”
Purchase
Purchase article

Purchasing article the PDF version will be downloaded

Purchase now
Contact
Phone for subscriptions and reporting of errors
From Monday to Friday from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. (GMT + 1) except for the months of July and August which will be from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Calls from Spain
932 415 960
Calls from outside Spain
+34 932 415 960
E-mail
asdasdasd
Article options
Tools