Literature DB >> 22041243

Computed tomography versus ureteroscopy in identification of renal tract stone with ureteral stent in situ.

V C Y Tang1, A Attwell-Heap.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to validate the use of non-contrast computed tomography (CT) with a ureteral stent in situ instead of ureteroscopy for identification of renal tract stones.
METHODS: All patients who had stents inserted for renal tract stones and underwent non-contrast CT with the stent in situ followed by ureteroscopy between May 2008 and October 2009 at The Canberra hospital, Australia, were analysed retrospectively. Statistical analysis was performed to compare any differences between CT and ureteroscopy in the identification of stones.
RESULTS: Overall, 57 patients were included in the study. The difference between CT and ureteroscopy findings was statistically significant. CT identification of stones with a stent in situ had a sensitivity of 86%, a specificity of 46%, a positive predictive value of 63%, a negative predictive value of 76% and an accuracy of 67%.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that non-contrast CT is inferior to the 'gold standard' of ureteroscopy. It lacks sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy. Therefore, we cannot recommend using non-contrast CT to replace ureteroscopy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22041243      PMCID: PMC3566692          DOI: 10.1308/003588411X13165261993996

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl        ISSN: 0035-8843            Impact factor:   1.891


  15 in total

1.  Spiral CT in the evaluation of flank pain: overall accuracy and feature analysis.

Authors:  J R Fielding; L A Fox; H Heller; S E Seltzer; C M Tempany; S G Silverman; G Steele
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1997 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.826

2.  Trends in the use of unenhanced helical CT for acute urinary colic.

Authors:  M Y Chen; R J Zagoria; H S Saunders; R B Dyer
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Ureteral calculi: diagnostic efficacy of helical CT and implications for treatment of patients.

Authors:  I Boulay; P Holtz; W D Foley; B White; F P Begun
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Can noncontrast helical computed tomography replace intravenous urography for evaluation of patients with acute urinary tract colic?

Authors:  M Y Chen; R J Zagoria
Journal:  J Emerg Med       Date:  1999 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.484

5.  The value of unenhanced helical computerized tomography in the management of acute flank pain.

Authors:  N C Dalrymple; M Verga; K R Anderson; P Bove; A M Covey; A T Rosenfield; R C Smith
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 6.  Unenhanced helical computerized tomography for the evaluation of patients with acute flank pain.

Authors:  J Vieweg; C Teh; K Freed; R A Leder; R H Smith; R H Nelson; G M Preminger
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007.

Authors:  Amy Berrington de González; Mahadevappa Mahesh; Kwang-Pyo Kim; Mythreyi Bhargavan; Rebecca Lewis; Fred Mettler; Charles Land
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2009-12-14

8.  [Sensitivity of abdominal radiography without preparation compared with computed tomography in the assessment of residual fragments after percutaneous nephrolithotomy].

Authors:  Christophe Pires; Frédéric Machet; Laurent Dahmani; Jacques Irani; Bertrand Dore
Journal:  Prog Urol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 0.915

9.  Distinguishing stent from stone: use of bone windows.

Authors:  Cigdem Tanrikut; Dushyant Sahani; Stephen P Dretler
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Diagnosis of acute flank pain: value of unenhanced helical CT.

Authors:  R C Smith; M Verga; S McCarthy; A T Rosenfield
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 3.959

View more
  3 in total

1.  Differentiation of ureteral stones and phleboliths using Hounsfield units on computerized tomography: a new method without observer bias.

Authors:  Yiloren Tanidir; Ahmet Sahan; Mehmet Kazim Asutay; Tarik Emre Sener; Farhad Talibzade; Asgar Garayev; Ilker Tinay; Cagri Akin Sekerci; Ferruh Simsek
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 3.436

2.  Reducing the rate of negative ureteroscopy: predictive factors and the role of preoperative imaging.

Authors:  A C Brodie; T J Johnston; P Lloyd; L Hemsworth; M Barabas; S R Keoghane
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2022-02-08       Impact factor: 1.951

3.  Predictors of spontaneous ureteral stone passage in the presence of an indwelling ureteral stent.

Authors:  Joseph M Kuebker; Jennifer Robles; Jordan J Kramer; Nicole L Miller; S Duke Herrell; Ryan S Hsi
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 3.436

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.