Harshavardhan Mahalingam1, Anupam Lal1, Arup K Mandal2, Shrawan Kumar Singh2, Shalmoli Bhattacharyya3, Niranjan Khandelwal1. 1. Department of Radiodiagnosis, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India. 2. Department of Urology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India. 3. Department of Biophysics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the accuracy of low-dose dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) in predicting the composition of urinary calculi. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 52 patients with urinary calculi were scanned with a 128-slice dual-source DECT scanner by use of a low-dose protocol. Dual-energy (DE) ratio, weighted average Hounsfield unit (HU) of calculi, radiation dose, and image noise levels were recorded. Two radiologists independently rated study quality. Stone composition was assessed after extraction by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIRS). Analysis of variance was used to determine if the differences in HU values and DE ratios between the various calculus groups were significant. Threshold cutoff values to classify the calculi into separate groups were identified by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. RESULTS: A total of 137 calculi were detected. FTIRS analysis differentiated the calculi into five groups: uric acid (n=17), struvite (n=3), calcium oxalate monohydrate and dihydrate (COM-COD, n=84), calcium oxalate monohydrate (COM, n=28), and carbonate apatite (n=5). The HU value could differentiate only uric acid calculi from calcified calculi (p<0.001). The DE ratio could confidently differentiate uric acid, struvite, calcium oxalate, and carbonate apatite calculi (p<0.001) with cutoff values of 1.12, 1.34, and 1.66, respectively, giving >80% sensitivity and specificity to differentiate them. The DE ratio could not differentiate COM from COM-COD calculi. No study was rated poor in quality by either of the observers. The mean radiation dose was 1.8 mSv. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose DECT accurately predicts urinary calculus composition in vivo while simultaneously reducing radiation exposure without compromising study quality.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the accuracy of low-dose dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) in predicting the composition of urinary calculi. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 52 patients with urinary calculi were scanned with a 128-slice dual-source DECT scanner by use of a low-dose protocol. Dual-energy (DE) ratio, weighted average Hounsfield unit (HU) of calculi, radiation dose, and image noise levels were recorded. Two radiologists independently rated study quality. Stone composition was assessed after extraction by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIRS). Analysis of variance was used to determine if the differences in HU values and DE ratios between the various calculus groups were significant. Threshold cutoff values to classify the calculi into separate groups were identified by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. RESULTS: A total of 137 calculi were detected. FTIRS analysis differentiated the calculi into five groups: uric acid (n=17), struvite (n=3), calcium oxalate monohydrate and dihydrate (COM-COD, n=84), calcium oxalate monohydrate (COM, n=28), and carbonate apatite (n=5). The HU value could differentiate only uric acid calculi from calcified calculi (p<0.001). The DE ratio could confidently differentiate uric acid, struvite, calcium oxalate, and carbonate apatite calculi (p<0.001) with cutoff values of 1.12, 1.34, and 1.66, respectively, giving >80% sensitivity and specificity to differentiate them. The DE ratio could not differentiate COM from COM-COD calculi. No study was rated poor in quality by either of the observers. The mean radiation dose was 1.8 mSv. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose DECT accurately predicts urinary calculus composition in vivo while simultaneously reducing radiation exposure without compromising study quality.
Authors: Mingliang Qu; Juan C Ramirez-Giraldo; Shuai Leng; James C Williams; Terri J Vrtiska; John C Lieske; Cynthia H McCollough Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: A P Evan; J Lingeman; F Coe; Y Shao; N Miller; B Matlaga; C Phillips; A Sommer; E Worcester Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2007-01-31 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Andrew N Primak; Joel G Fletcher; Terri J Vrtiska; Oleksandr P Dzyubak; John C Lieske; Molly E Jackson; James C Williams; Cynthia H McCollough Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 3.173