Literature DB >> 15758192

Unenhanced multi-detector row CT in patients suspected of having urinary stone disease: effect of section width on diagnosis.

Mazda Memarsadeghi1, Gertraud Heinz-Peer, Thomas H Helbich, Cornelia Schaefer-Prokop, Gero Kramer, Martina Scharitzer, Mathias Prokop.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess prospectively the effect of section width in multi-detector row computed tomographic (CT) evaluation of patients with acute flank pain who are suspected of having or known to have urinary stone disease.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was approved by the ethics committee of the authors' university, and written informed consent was obtained from all patients. One hundred forty-seven patients (age range, 11-101 years; mean, 51.4 years +/- 18.7 [standard deviation]) suspected of having urinary stone disease underwent unenhanced multi-detector row CT. CT was performed with four detector rows, a section thickness of 1.0 mm, an effective tube current-time product of 100 mAs, and a tube voltage of 120 kVp (CT dose index, 11.4 mGy). From these data, three sets of transverse images were reconstructed with section widths of 1.5, 3.0, and 5.0 mm and approximately 50% of overlap each. Scans were evaluated in varying random orders by two radiologists for the number, size, and location of uroliths and nephroliths and for the presence of phleboliths, renal cysts, and secondary signs of obstruction. The significance of differences between the numbers of detected calcifications and the numbers of associated abnormalities on the scans obtained with varying section widths was tested with the McNemar test at a P level of less than .05. Spearman rho rank correlation coefficients were calculated to assess the correlation between the presence of uroliths and the presence of secondary signs.
RESULTS: Uroliths were found in 72 of 147 (49.0%) patients, and nephroliths were found in 16 patients (10.9%). There was no significant difference between section widths of 1.5 and 3.0 mm with regard to the number of detected stones (264 uroliths and 61 nephroliths for both protocols). Transverse sections 5.0-mm wide revealed significantly fewer uroliths (n = 231; P < .001) and nephroliths (n = 47; P < .016). The final diagnosis was changed in four of 72 patients. All missed renal and ureteral stones measured less than 3 mm in diameter.
CONCLUSION: Overlapping 3-mm sections are sufficient for the detection of urinary stone disease. Small calculi (<3 mm) may be missed on 5.0-mm-thick sections. (c) RSNA, 2005.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15758192     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2352040448

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  11 in total

1.  The reliability of color doppler "twinkling" artifact for diagnosing millimetrical nephrolithiasis: comparison with B-Mode US and CT scanning results.

Authors:  Alpaslan Yavuz; Kagan Ceken; Emel Alimoglu; Adnan Kabaalioglu
Journal:  J Med Ultrason (2001)       Date:  2014-12-12       Impact factor: 1.314

2.  Diagnostic utility of attenuation measurement (Hounsfield units) in computed tomography stonogram in predicting the radio-opacity of urinary calculi in plain abdominal radiographs.

Authors:  Michael E Chua; Glenn T Gatchalian; Michael Vincent Corsino; Buenaventura B Reyes
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2012-05-12       Impact factor: 2.370

3.  Prevalence of ligamentum arteriosum calcification on multi-section spiral CT and digital radiography.

Authors:  Gil-Sun Hong; Hyun Woo Goo; Jae-Woo Song
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 2.357

Review 4.  Current management of paediatric urolithiasis.

Authors:  Ehud Gnessin; Leonid Chertin; Boris Chertin
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2012-04-28       Impact factor: 1.827

Review 5.  An overview of kidney stone imaging techniques.

Authors:  Wayne Brisbane; Michael R Bailey; Mathew D Sorensen
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2016-08-31       Impact factor: 14.432

6.  The outcome of computed tomography in patients with acute renal colic from a low-volume hospital.

Authors:  L Lund; U L Larsen; E Anderson; N T Mikkelsen; G Holt
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.370

7.  Unenhanced MDCT in suspected urolithiasis: improved stone detection and density measurements using coronal maximum-intensity-projection images.

Authors:  Michael T Corwin; Margaret Hsu; John P McGahan; Machelle Wilson; Ramit Lamba
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 8.  Recent finding and new technologies in nephrolitiasis: a review of the recent literature.

Authors:  Marco Rosa; Paolo Usai; Roberto Miano; Fernando J Kim; Enrico Finazzi Agrò; Pierluigi Bove; Salvatore Micali
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2013-02-16       Impact factor: 2.264

Review 9.  Imaging of the urinary tract: the role of CT and MRI.

Authors:  Melanie P Hiorns
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 3.714

Review 10.  Advances in CT imaging for urolithiasis.

Authors:  Yasir Andrabi; Manuel Patino; Chandan J Das; Brian Eisner; Dushyant V Sahani; Avinash Kambadakone
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2015 Jul-Sep
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.