{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,31]],"date-time":"2026-08-31T14:16:32Z","timestamp":1788185792551,"version":"build-2803163510"},"reference-count":27,"publisher":"MJS Publishing, Medical Journals Sweden AB","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,31]],"date-time":"2026-08-31T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1788134400000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["SJU"],"abstract":"<jats:p>Objective: This study aimed to assess nationwide trends in registered upper urinary tract stone disease and stone-related procedures in Iceland.\nMaterial and methods: We performed a nationwide retrospective population-based study of adults aged 18 years or older with International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision codes N20, N22 or N23 in national hospital and specialist-care data from 2010 to 2024. Crude and age-standardised incidence rates were calculated per 100,000 adults. Stone-related procedures from 2013 to 2024 were identified using Nordic Classification of Surgical Procedures codes. Temporal trends were analysed using negative binomial regression with population offsets.\nResults: The cohort included 9,492 adults. Registered incidence ranged from 221 to 260 per 100,000 adults and remained stable (95% confidence interval \u22120.6% to 0.6%; p = 0.914); age standardisation and alternative case definitions gave the same conclusion. Among patients first registered from 2013 onward, 2,432\/7,766 (31%) underwent a stone-related procedure. The procedure rate increased from 124.3 to 236.5 per 100,000 adults, corresponding to a 6% annual increase. Ureteroscopy accounted for 10% of procedure registrations in 2013\u20132016 and 30% in 2021\u20132024, while shock wave lithotripsy remained the most common procedure.\nConclusions: Registered upper urinary tract stone incidence remained stable, but treatment activity increased substantially. Ureteroscopy use rose rapidly, although shock wave lithotripsy remained the predominant procedure.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.2340\/sju.v61.46753","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,31]],"date-time":"2026-08-31T13:44:04Z","timestamp":1788183844000},"page":"210-215","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Nationwide trends in urolithiasis and stone procedures in Iceland"],"prefix":"10.2340","volume":"61","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0006-8570-274X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Bragi","family":"A\u00f0alsteinsson","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0004-1924-4758","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Edward","family":"Rumba","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-0405-5562","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"J\u00f3hann P\u00e1ll","family":"Ingimarsson","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"1183","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,31]]},"reference":[{"key":"166954","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Sorokin I, Mamoulakis C, Miyazawa K, et al. Epidemiology of stone disease across the world. World J Urol. 2017;35(9):1301\u20131320.","DOI":"10.1007\/s00345-017-2008-6"},{"key":"166955","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Vaughan LE, Enders FT, Lieske JC, et al. Predictors of symptomatic kidney stone recurrence after the first and subsequent episodes. Mayo Clin Proc. 2019;94(2):202\u2013210.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.mayocp.2018.09.016"},{"key":"166956","unstructured":"Hyams ES, Matlaga BR. Economic impact of urinary stones. Transl Androl Urol. 2014;3(3):278\u2013283."},{"key":"166957","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Pietropaolo A, Keller EX, Sener TE, et al. Economic burden of imaging and interventions in endourology: a worldwide cost analysis from European Association of Urology Young Academic Urology Endourology and Urolithiasis Working Party. J Endourol. 2025;39(4):389\u2013398.","DOI":"10.1089\/end.2024.0673"},{"key":"166958","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"GBD 2021 Urolithiasis Collaborators. The global, regional, and national burden of urolithiasis in 204 countries and territories, 2000\u20132021: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. EClinicalMedicine. 2024;78:102924.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.eclinm.2024.102924"},{"key":"166959","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Raheem OA, Khandwala YS, Sur RL, et al. Burden of urolithiasis: trends in prevalence, treatments, and costs. Eur Urol Focus. 2017;3(1):18\u201326.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.euf.2017.04.001"},{"key":"166960","unstructured":"European Association of Urology. EAU guidelines on urolithiasis [Internet]. Arnhem: EAU Guidelines Office; 2025 [cited 2026 Jul 29]. Available from: https:\/\/uroweb.org\/guidelines\/urolithiasis"},{"key":"166961","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, et al. Surgical management of stones: American Urological Association\/Endourological Society guideline, part I. J Urol. 2016;196(4):1153\u20131160.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2016.05.090"},{"key":"166962","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Herout R, Baunacke M, Groeben C, et al. Contemporary treatment trends for upper urinary tract stones in a total population analysis in Germany from 2006 to 2019: will shock wave lithotripsy become extinct? World J Urol. 2022;40(1):185\u2013191.","DOI":"10.1007\/s00345-021-03818-y"},{"key":"166963","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Monga M, Murphy M, Paranjpe R, et al. Prevalence of stone disease and procedure trends in the United States. Urology. 2023;176:63\u201368.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2023.03.040"},{"key":"166964","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Ordon M, Lantz Powers A, Chew BH, et al. Incidence and trends in the treatment of kidney stones in Canada: a population-based cohort study. Can Urol Assoc J. 2024;18(6):158\u2013164.","DOI":"10.5489\/cuaj.8596"},{"key":"166965","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Julieb\u00f8-Jones P, Gjengst\u00f8 P, \u00c6s\u00f8y MS, et al. National trends in hospital encounters, outpatient consultations and surgeries for urolithiasis in Norway. Scand J Urol. 2025;60:244\u2013249.","DOI":"10.2340\/sju.v60.45214"},{"key":"166966","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Edvardsson VO, Indridason OS, Haraldsson G, et al. Temporal trends in the incidence of kidney stone disease. Kidney Int. 2013;83(1):146\u2013152.","DOI":"10.1038\/ki.2012.320"},{"key":"166967","unstructured":"Icelandic Directorate of Health. National health registries [Internet]. Reykjav\u00edk: Icelandic Directorate of Health; [cited 2026 Jul 29]. Available from: https:\/\/island.is\/s\/landlaeknir\/gagnasofn-embaettis-landlaeknis"},{"key":"166968","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Laugesen K, Ludvigsson JF, Schmidt M, et al. Nordic health registry-based research: a review of health care systems and key registries. Clin Epidemiol. 2021;13:533\u2013554.","DOI":"10.2147\/CLEP.S314959"},{"key":"166969","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"R\u00f6gnvaldsson S, Long TE, Thorsteinsdottir S, et al. Validity of chronic disease diagnoses in Icelandic healthcare registries. Scand J Public Health. 2023;51(2):173\u2013178.","DOI":"10.1177\/14034948211059974"},{"key":"166970","unstructured":"Statistics Iceland. Population by sex and age [Internet]. Reykjav\u00edk: Statistics Iceland; [cited 2026 Jul 29]. Available from: https:\/\/px.hagstofa.is"},{"key":"166971","unstructured":"World Health Organization. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems, 10th revision (ICD-10) [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019 [cited 2026 Jul 29]. Available from: https:\/\/icd.who.int\/browse10\/2019\/en"},{"key":"166972","unstructured":"Nordic Medico-Statistical Committee. NOMESCO Classification of Surgical Procedures (NCSP), version 1.16. Copenhagen: Nordic Medico-Statistical Committee; 2011."},{"key":"166973","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Dobson AJ, Kuulasmaa K, Eberle E, et al. Confidence intervals for weighted suwms of Poisson parameters. Stat Med. 1991;10(3):457\u2013462.","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.4780100317"},{"key":"166974","unstructured":"R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing [Internet]. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2025 [cited 2026 Jul 29]. Available from: https:\/\/www.R-project.org\/"},{"key":"166975","unstructured":"Posit Team. RStudio: integrated development environment for R [Internet]. Boston, MA: Posit Software, PBC; 2025 [cited 2026 Jul 29]. Available from: https:\/\/posit.co\/"},{"key":"166976","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Lieske JC, Pe\u00f1a de la Vega LS, Slezak JM, et al. Renal stone epidemiology in Rochester, Minnesota: an update. Kidney Int. 2006;69(4):760\u2013764.","DOI":"10.1038\/sj.ki.5000150"},{"key":"166977","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Kittanamongkolchai W, Vaughan LE, Enders FT, et al. The changing incidence and presentation of urinary stones over 3 decades. Mayo Clin Proc. 2018;93(3):291\u2013299.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.mayocp.2017.11.018"},{"key":"166978","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Dasgupta R, Cameron S, Aucott L, et al. Shockwave lithotripsy versus ureteroscopic treatment as therapeutic interventions for stones of the ureter (TISU): a multicentre randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Eur Urol. 2021;80(1):46\u201354.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.eururo.2021.02.044"},{"key":"166979","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Geraghty RM, Jones P, Herrmann TRW, et al. Ureteroscopy is more cost effective than shock wave lithotripsy for stone treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Urol. 2018;36(11):1783\u20131793.","DOI":"10.1007\/s00345-018-2320-9"},{"key":"166980","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Julieb\u00f8-Jones P, Keller EX, Tailly T, et al. The art of shockwave lithotripsy is an endangered species and is worth saving: the perspective of the European Association of Urology Young Academic Urology Urolithiasis group. World J Urol. 2022;40(5):1265\u20131266.","DOI":"10.1007\/s00345-021-03883-3"}],"container-title":["Scandinavian Journal of Urology"],"original-title":[],"link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/medicaljournalssweden.se\/SJU\/article\/download\/46753\/55319","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/medicaljournalssweden.se\/SJU\/article\/download\/46753\/55319","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,31]],"date-time":"2026-08-31T13:44:12Z","timestamp":1788183852000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/medicaljournalssweden.se\/SJU\/article\/view\/46753"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,31]]},"references-count":27,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2340\/sju.v61.46753","relation":{},"ISSN":["2168-1813"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2168-1813","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,31]]}}}