Azizoglu, MustafaSagir, Suleyman2025-03-152025-03-1520231579-58532255-0569https://doi.org/10.3306/AJHS.2023.38.06.74https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12514/6683Objective: The present study was designed to examine the differences in NLR, PLR, and PNLR between two distinct patient groups, further examining their utility as diagnostic markers.Materials and methods: Patients were then separated into two categories: Group 1 (those not require DJ catheter insertion) and Group 2 (those needed DJ catheter insertion). Factors such as patient age, gender, symptoms, diagnosis, hematological parameters, and some indexes (NLR, PLR, and PNLR) were thoroughly assessed.Results: The research study featured 150 participants, split into two groups of 80 (Group 1) and 70 (Group 2) individuals. Despite average age differences, the distribution of ages was statistically significant. Group 1 had more children, while Group 2 contained more adults. Gender distribution between groups was not significantly different. Group 2 had larger mean stone sizes than Group 1. Stone location showed no significant variation between the groups. WBC and NEU were higher in Group 2, while LYM was higher in Group 1. There was no significant difference in MONO, PLT, and urea levels, but CRE level was higher in Group 2. NLR, PLR, and PNLR were also significantly higher in Group 2. Cut-off values for NLR, PLR, and PNLR had moderate to good predictive abilities. There was a positive correlation between stone size and PNLR index.Conclusions: Our study demonstrates the predictive utility of hematological parameters (NLR, PLR, PNLR) in determining the need for DJ catheter placement in ureteral stone patients.en10.3306/AJHS.2023.38.06.74info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessUreteral StoneInflammatory IndexNeutrophil-Lymphocyte RatioPlatelet-Lymphocyte RatioPlatelet-Neutrophillymphocyte RatioArticle386N/AN/AWOS:001130784100002