Purpose: The decision on the choice of proximal ureteral stone therapy depends on many factors, and sometimes urologists have difficulty in choosing the treatment option. This study is aimed at evaluating the factors affecting the success of semirigid ureterorenoscopy (URS) using the “decision tree” method. Materials and Methods: From January 2005 to November 2015, the data of consecutive patients treated for proximal ureteral stone were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 920 patients with proximal ureteral stone treated with semirigid URS were included in the study. All statistically significant attributes were tested using the decision tree method. Results: The model created using decision tree had a sensitivity of 0.993 and an accuracy of 0.857. While URS treatment was successful in 752 patients (81.7%), it was unsuccessful in 168 patients (18.3%). According to the decision tree method, the most important factor affecting the success of URS is whether the stone is impacted to the ureteral wall. The second most important factor affecting treatment was intramural stricture requiring dilatation if the stone is impacted, and the size of the stone if not impacted. Conclusions: Our study suggests that the impacted stone, intramural stricture requiring dilatation and stone size may have a significant effect on the success rate of semirigid URS for proximal ureteral stone. Further studies with population-based and longitudinal design should be conducted to confirm this finding.

Keywords:
Decision tree, Failed extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, Holmium laser, Impacted stone, Intramural stricture, Proximal ureteral stone
1.
Aboumarzouk OM, Somani B, Monga M: Safety and efficacy of ureteroscopic lithotripsy for stone disease in obese patients: a systematic review of the literature. BJU Int 2012;110(8 pt B):E374-E380.
2.
Turk C, Petrik A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M, et al: EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Uro 2016;69:475-482.
3.
Türk C, Knoll T, Petrik A, Sarica K, Skolarikos A, Straub M: Guidelines on Urolithiasis. Anheim, European Association of Urology, 2014 (cited January 5, 2015).
4.
Giulianelli R, Gentile BC, Vincenti G, Mavilla L, Albanesi L, Attisani F, et al: Low-cost semirigid ureteroscopy is effective for ureteral stones: experience of a single high volume center. Arch Ital Urol Androl 2014;86:118-222.
5.
Song YY, Lu Y: Decision tree methods: applications for classification and prediction. Shanghai Arch Psychiatry 2015;27:130.
6.
Sarica K, Kafkasli A, Yazici O, Cetinel AC, Demirkol MK, Tuncer M, et al: Ureteral wall thickness at the impacted ureteral stone site: a critical predictor for success rates after SWL. Urolithiasis 2015;43:83-88.
7.
Han J, Kamber M: Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques. Chapter 2: Data Preprocessing. San Francisco, Elsevier Inc., 2006, pp 47-97.
8.
Sancak EB, Resorlu M, Akbas A, Gulpinar MT, Arslan M, Resorlu B: Do hypertension, diabetes mellitus and obesity increase the risk of severity of nephrolithiasis? Pak J Med Sci 2015;31:566-571.
9.
Karadag MA, Demir A, Cecen K, Bagcioglu M, Kocaaslan R, Altunrende F: Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus semirigid ureteroscopy for the treatment of proximal ureteral stones: a retrospective comparative analysis of 124 patients. Urol J 2014;11:1867-1872.
10.
Durner L, Bach C, El Howairis Mel F, Hakenberg OW, Buchholz N: Current trends in urolithiasis treatment in various European health systems. Urol Int 2016;96:125-131.
11.
Rokach L, Maimon O: Top-down induction of decision trees classifiers - a survey. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern 2005;35:476-487.
12.
Barros RC, Basgalupp MP, De Carvalho AC, Freitas A: A survey of evolutionary algorithms for decision-tree induction. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B Cybern 2012;42:291-312.
13.
Takada M, Sugimoto M, Naito Y, Moon HG, Han W, Noh DY, et al: Prediction of axillary lymph node metastasis in primary breast cancer patients using a decision tree-based model. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2012;12:54.
14.
Yang Z, Dong L, Zhang Y, Yang C, Gou S, Li Y, et al: Prediction of severe acute pancreatitis using a decision tree model based on the revised Atlanta classification of acute pancreatitis. PLoS One 2015;10:e0143486.
15.
Kilinc MF, Doluoglu OG, Karakan T, Dalkilic A, Sonmez NC, Aydogmus Y, et al: Ureteroscopy in proximal ureteral stones after shock wave lithotripsy failure: is it safe and efficient or dangerous? Can Urol Assoc J 2015;9:E718-E722.
16.
Liu Y, Zhou Z, Xia A, Dai H, Guo L, Zheng J: Clinical observation of different minimally invasive surgeries for the treatment of impacted upper ureteral calculi. Pak J Med Sci 2013;29:1358-1362.
17.
Bozkurt IH, Yonguc T, Arslan B, Degirmenci T, Gunlusoy B, Aydogdu O, et al: Minimally invasive surgical treatment for large impacted upper ureteral stones: ureteroscopic lithotripsy or percutaneous nephrolithotomy? Can Urol Assoc J 2015;9:E122-E125.
18.
Degirmenci T, Gunlusoy B, Kozacioglu Z, Arslan M, Kara C, Koras O, et al: Outcomes of ureteroscopy for the management of impacted ureteral calculi with different localizations. Urology 2012;80:811-815.
19.
Yuksel OH, Akan S, Urkmez A, Uruc F, Verit A: Efficacy and safety of semirigid ureteroscopy combined with holmium: YAG laser in the treatment of upper urinary tract calculi: is it a good alternative treatment option of flexible ureteroscopy for developing countries. J Pak Med Assoc 2015;65:1193-1196.
20.
Ahmed A, Maarouf A, Shalaby E, Alshahrani S, El-feky M, Khaled S, et al: Semi-rigid ureteroscopy for proximal ureteral stones: does adjunctive tamsulosin therapy increase the chance of success? Urol Int 2016, Epub ahead of print.
© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel
2017
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.