Effect of Lower Infundibulopelvic Angle, Lower Infundibulum Diameter and Inferior Calyceal Length on Stone Formation

Abstract

The effect of anatomical factors such as lower infundibulopelvic angle (LIPA), lower infundibulum diameter (LID) and inferior calyceal length (ICL) on renal stone formation was investigated. These parameters were measured from noncalculous kidneys of 40 healthy kidney donors. The same parameters from 119 patients with single, unilateral, nonobstructive lower calyceal stone were also measured. LID and ICL were significantly higher in calculous kidneys when compared to the control group. On the other hand, the difference between the LIPA of the two groups was not significant. It is concluded that LID and ICL could be good indices in determining lower calyceal stone formation.

The impact of pelvicaliceal anatomical variation between the stone-bearing and normal contralateral kidney on stone formation in adult patients with lower caliceal stones

“…Although gravitational factor might be more effective than the effect of the upper or middle caliceal variations on stone formation, these findings are also inadequate to explain the lateralization of the stone unless the stone exists in this defective upper or middle calyx. On the hand, there are only few studies, which focus on the etiologic role of these intrarenal anatomical factors (11,12). Gökalp et al compared 119 lower caliceal stoneforming kidneys with 40 healthy controls and they concluded that lower pole IPA was not an important factor for stone formation in lower calyx similar to our study (11).…”

“…On the hand, there are only few studies, which focus on the etiologic role of these intrarenal anatomical factors (11,12). Gökalp et al compared 119 lower caliceal stoneforming kidneys with 40 healthy controls and they concluded that lower pole IPA was not an important factor for stone formation in lower calyx similar to our study (11).…”

Renal Anatomical Factors for the Lower Calyceal Stone Formation

“…The difference between two sides was not statistically significant (p>0.05). Go¨kalp et al founded the LID (to be) higher in the stone formers (mean 9.98 mm) and they claimed that the LID was a possible risk factor for stone formation [12]. The difference between our results and those of Go¨kalp et al can be due to the difference in the method of measurements.…”

“…They reported a mean ICL of 32.54 mm for calculous kidneys and 20.99 mm for the noncalculous control group. The difference between these two values was statistically significant [12]. The measurement method was as described by Sampaio and Arago [13].…”

Correlation between Anatomical Variations of Lower Pelvicalyceal System and Isolated Lower Pole Calculus Formation Compared with Non-stone Bearing Contralateral Kidney: Case Control Study

“…5 But Gökalp et al observed no significant difference in IUPA between the calculus kidneys with healthy controls and concluded that lower pole IUPA was not an important factor for stone formation in the lower calyx. 18 Kupeli et al also found no difference in IUPA between the calculus kidney and contralateral calculus free kidney. 3 In our study, the infundibulocalyceal length (ICL) of the calculus-bearing kidney was significantly longer than the calculus-free kidney similar to the finding of Gokalp.18 However, Kupeli B et al found no difference in IL between the two sides.…”