Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Consensus statement addressing controversies and guidelines on pediatric urolithiasis

  • S. Güven
  • , T. Tokas
  • , A. Tozsin
  • , B. Haid
  • , T. S. Lendvay
  • , S. Silay
  • , V. C. Mohan
  • , J. R. Cansino
  • , S. Saulat
  • , M. Straub
  • , A. Bujons Tur
  • , B. Akgül
  • , J. Samotyjek
  • , L. Lusuardi
  • , S. Ferretti
  • , O. F. Cavdar
  • , G. Ortner
  • , S. Sultan
  • , S. Choong
  • , S. Micali
  • I. Saltirov, A. Sezer, C. Netsch, E. de Lorenzis, O. O. Cakir, G. Zeng, A. S. Gozen, G. Bianchi, B. Jurkiewicz, T. Knoll, J. Rassweiler, K. Ahmed, K. Sarica
  • Necmettin Erbakan University
  • Heraklion University Hospital
  • Trakya University
  • Barmherzige Scwestern Hospital
  • University of Washington
  • Istanbul Medipol University
  • Preeti Urology Hospital
  • Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
  • Tabba Heart Institute
  • Technical University of Munich
  • Autonomous University of Barcelona
  • Pediatric Surgery and Urology Clinic CMKP in Dziekanów Leśny
  • Paracelsus Private Medical University
  • University of Modena and Reggio Emilia
  • General Hospital Hall I.T
  • Menoufia University
  • University College London
  • Military Medical Academy, Sofia
  • Konya City Hospital
  • Asklepios Klinik BarmbekAbteilung Für Urologie
  • IRCCS Fondazione Ca'Granda – Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico - Milano
  • King's College London
  • First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University
  • Medius Clinic
  • Klinikum Sindelfingen-Boeblingen
  • Danube Private University (DPU)
  • Sancaktepe Sehit Prof. Dr. Ilhan Varank Research and Training Hospital

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

11 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: We aimed to investigate controversial pediatric urolithiasis issues systematically, integrating expert consensus and comprehensive guidelines reviews. Methods: Two semi-structured online focus group meetings were conducted to discuss the study’s need and content, review current literature, and prepare the initial survey. Data were collected through surveys and focus group discussions. Existing guidelines were reviewed, and a second survey was conducted using the Delphi method to validate findings and facilitate consensus. The primary outcome measures investigated controversial issues, integrating expert consensus and guideline reviews. Results: Experts from 15 countries participated, including 20 with 16+ years of experience, 2 with 11–15 years, and 4 with 6–10 years. The initial survey identified nine main themes, emphasizing the need for standardized diagnostic and treatment protocols and tailored treatments. Inter-rater reliability was high, with controversies in treatment approaches (score 4.6, 92% agreement), follow-up protocols (score 4.8, 100% agreement), and diagnostic criteria (score 4.6, 92% agreement). The second survey underscored the critical need for consensus on identification, diagnostic criteria (score 4.6, 92% agreement), and standardized follow-up protocols (score 4.8, 100% agreement). Conclusion: The importance of personalized treatment in pediatric urolithiasis is clear. Prioritizing low-radiation diagnostic tools, effectively managing residual stone fragments, and standardized follow-up protocols are crucial for improving patient outcomes. Integrating new technologies while ensuring safety and reliability is also essential. Harmonizing guidelines across regions can provide consistent and effective management. Future efforts should focus on collaborative research, specialized training, and the integration of new technologies in treatment protocols.

Original languageEnglish
Article number473
JournalWorld Journal of Urology
Volume42
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2024

Keywords

  • ESWL
  • Guidelines
  • Metabolic evaluation
  • PCNL
  • Pediatric urolithiasis
  • Ureteroscopy

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Consensus statement addressing controversies and guidelines on pediatric urolithiasis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this