Endoscopic Evaluation of Ureteral Stone Impaction Highlights Significant Variability in Definitions Between Endourologists
<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Previous studies attempting to predict impaction on CT have relied on various criteria without a gold standard for comparison. Intraoperative single-surgeon estimations of impaction have been unvalidated and subjective. This study aimed to investigate surgeon perspectives and variability in estimating ureteral stone impaction based on a curated ureteroscopy video catalog. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A catalog of 35 primary ureteroscopy cases was distributed to a group of fellowship-trained endourologists. All videos featured visual inspection of tissue around the stone, attempted passage of a guidewire adjacent to the stone, and an attempt to dislodge the stone with gentle nudging of the scope. Participants independently rated impaction on two different scales: continuous (0-9) and categorical (none/mild/moderate/severe). After a first pass, participants rated the videos in a new, random order. Inter- and intrarater agreement across both rating systems was evaluated. <b><i>Results:</i></b> In total, 35 videos were evaluated by 13 endourologists. Overall, 13/35 videos had strong agreement (>70%) on the degree of impaction (6 none, 7 severe), and only 2 of these had 100% agreement (1 none, 1 severe). Continuous scale ratings mirrored the categorical ratings for the none and severe impaction cases. There were no cases with consensus agreement of mild or moderate impaction. More than one-third (12/35) of videos had at least one vote for each of the four severity categories, indicating stark disagreement between surgeons on what constitutes impaction. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> There is significant variability among endourologists regarding the definition and severity of stone impaction. When strong agreement occurs, it is when a stone is deemed to be severely impacted or not impacted. Further work is needed to create a standardized definition of impaction based on objective endoscopic criteria. A tripartite classification system may be the most appropriate manner of grouping ureteral stones based on impaction.
Authors
- Robert T. Chang (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2950-7951)
- William Atallah (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8584-2861)
- David M. Hoenig
- Raymond Khargi
- Alexander Small (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1584-4690)
- Arun Rai (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0201-2438)
- Christopher Hartman
- Jared S. Winoker (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8499-7041)
- Sarah Razavi (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9258-8563)
- Charan Mohan (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6469-5898)
- Bo Yi (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7273-6741)
- Tareq Aro (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6734-9384)
- Mantu Gupta (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8448-285X)
- Zeph Okeke
- Jonathan Khusid
- Dima Raskolnikov (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8182-8779)
- Arthur D. Smith
- Gregory Mullen
Institutions
- Northwell Health (US)
- Montefiore Medical Center (US)
- Lenox Hill Hospital (US)
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of Endourology
- Published
- 2025-09-01
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1177/08927790251362867
- Primary Topic
- Kidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00