Reply by the Authors

摘要

We appreciate the editorial comments regarding our report and would like to address the authors' concerns.We are in agreement with the authors' indications that the stone surface area (SA) should be measured using noncontrast computed tomography rather than using kidney-ureter-bladder (KUB) films. We think that the SA measured using noncontrast computed tomography must be more reliable than that using KUB. In clinical practice, however, the SA was usually obtained by KUB, because KUB is readily available and inexpensive. ' Therefore, in our report, we evaluated the utility and priority of 3 parameters of renal stone burden, including the SA, as measured by KUB.