Objectives: To validate AutoMated UroLithiasis Evaluation Tool (AMULET) software for kidney stone volumetry and compare its performance to standard clinical practice.
Materials and methods: Maximum diameter and volume of 96 urinary stones were measured as reference standard by three independent urologists. The same stones were positioned in an anthropomorphic phantom and CT scans acquired in standard settings. Three independent radiologists blinded to the reference values took manual measurements of the maximum diameter and automatic measurements of maximum diameter and volume. An "expected volume" was calculated based on manual diameter measurements using the formula: [Formula: see text] Results: Ninety-six stones were analyzed in the study. We had initially aimed to assess 100. Nine were replaced during data acquisition due of crumbling and four had to be excluded because the automated measurement did not work. Mean reference maximum diameter was 13.3 mm (5.2-32.1 mm). Correlation coefficients among all measured outcomes were compared. The correlation between the manual and automatic diameter measurements to the reference was 0.98 and 0.91, respectively (p < 0.001). Mean reference volume was 1200 mm3 (10-9000 mm3). The correlation between the "expected volume" and automatically measured volume to the reference was 0.95 and 0.99, respectively (p < 0.001).
Conclusions: Patients' kidney stone burden is usually assessed according to maximum diameter. However, as most stones are not spherical, this entails a potential bias. Automated stone volumetry is possible and significantly more accurate than diameter-based volumetric calculations. To avoid bias in clinical trials, size should be measured as volume. However, automated diameter measurements are not as accurate as manual measurements.
Keywords: CT; UroLithiasis; percutaneous nephrolithotripsy; stone volume.