Literature DB >> 28139077

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of low-dose computed tomography of the kidneys, ureters and bladder for urolithiasis.

Hao Xiang1, Michael Chan1, Victoria Brown2, Ya Ruth Huo3, Lewis Chan4, Lloyd Ridley1.   

Abstract

Renal colic is a common clinical condition which is often investigated with a CT of the kidneys, ureters and bladder (CTKUB). Recent technological improvements have allowed a reduction in dose with the emergence of low-dose CTKUB (LD-CTKUB) techniques. The present meta-analysis aims to determine the diagnostic accuracy of LD-CTKUB in the diagnosis of clinically significant uroliths. A systematic review was performed using nine electronic databases from their dates of inception to May 2016. Inclusion criteria included studies reporting comparative outcomes using LD-CTKUB with a dose less than 3 millisieverts compared to an imaging gold standard or clinical and surgical evaluation. The primary endpoint was detection of a urolith ≥3 mm where specified and any urolith when size was unspecified. Twelve studies were identified according to selection criteria, involving 1250 patients. LD-CTKUB demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 93.1% (95%CI 91.5-94.4), specificity of 96.6% (95%CI 95.1-97.7%), positive likelihood ratio of 19.9 (95%CI 12.7-31.2), negative likelihood ratio of 0.05 (95%CI 0.02-0.10) and AUC of 0.9877 in the detection of clinically significant uroliths. Although 86 alternative diagnoses were noted across seven studies, none assessed the accuracy of LD-CTKUB in their detection. The majority of newer studies report an average radiation dose from 1 to 1.5 millisieverts. This study demonstrates a high sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value in the detection of uroliths, however, its accuracy in the detection of alternative diagnoses is unknown. Therefore, we recommend using LD-CTKUB when the pre-test probability of stone disease is significantly higher than the pre-test probability of alternative diagnoses, such as follow-up of known calculi. We suggest caution when the pre-test probability of alternative diagnoses is high, such as the initial presentation of renal colic.
© 2017 The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists.

Entities:  

Keywords:  abdomen; physics; urinary tract imaging; uroradiology

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28139077     DOI: 10.1111/1754-9485.12587

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol        ISSN: 1754-9477            Impact factor:   1.735


  10 in total

1.  Comparison of Ultrasonography and Low-Dose Computed Tomography for the Diagnosis of Pediatric Urolithiasis in the Emergency Department.

Authors:  Recep Sade; Hayri Ogul; Suat Eren; Akin Levent; Mecit Kantarci
Journal:  Eurasian J Med       Date:  2017-06

2.  In-vitro comparison of different slice thicknesses and kernel settings for measurement of urinary stone size by computed tomography.

Authors:  Roland Umbach; Jochen-Klaus Müller; Gunnar Wendt-Nordahl; Thomas Knoll; Jan Peter Jessen
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2019-01-16       Impact factor: 3.436

3.  The diagnostic yield of computed tomography in the management of acute flank pain and the emergency intervention rate for a proven acute ureteric stone.

Authors:  S Keoghane; T Austin; J Coode-Bate; S Deverill; T Drake; J Sanpera-Iglesias; T Johnston
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2018-10-05       Impact factor: 1.891

4.  Increased urinary bladder volume improves the detectability of urinary stones at the ureterovesical junction in non-enhanced computed tomography (NECT).

Authors:  Maxim Avanesov; Julja Togmat; Mehtap Solmaz; Michael Gerhard Kaul; Azien Laqmani; Helena Guerreiro; Sarah Keller; Lars Weisbach; Gerhard Adam; Jin Yamamura
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  [Update of the 2Sk guidelines on the diagnostics, treatment and metaphylaxis of urolithiasis (AWMF register number 043-025) : What is new?]

Authors:  C Seitz; T Bach; M Bader; W Berg; T Knoll; A Neisius; C Netsch; M Nothacker; S Schmidt; M Schönthaler; R Siener; R Stein; M Straub; W Strohmaier; C Türk; B Volkmer
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 0.639

6.  Side-by-side evaluation of virtual non-contrast and post-contrast images improves detection of clinically significant urolithiasis on single-phase split bolus dual-energy CT urography.

Authors:  Doris Dodig; Tereza Solocki Matić; Iva Žuža; Ivan Pavlović; Damir Miletić; Dean Markić
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-04-16       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 7.  [Recommendations of the Urolithiasis Committee of the French Urology Association for the management and the treatment of the stone formers patients during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis].

Authors:  C Almeras; E Denis; P Meria; V Estrade; G Raynal; A Hoznek; B Malval; S Dominique; S Bart; J R Gautier; N Abid
Journal:  Prog Urol       Date:  2020-05-04       Impact factor: 0.915

Review 8.  Optimal Delivery of Follow-Up Care for the Prevention of Stone Recurrence in Urolithiasis Patients: Improving Outcomes.

Authors:  Lazaros Tzelves; Marinos Berdempes; Panagiotis Mourmouris; Iraklis Mitsogiannis; Andreas Skolarikos
Journal:  Res Rep Urol       Date:  2022-04-19

9.  Deep learning model-assisted detection of kidney stones on computed tomography.

Authors:  Alper Caglayan; Mustafa Ozan Horsanali; Kenan Kocadurdu; Eren Ismailoglu; Serkan Guneyli
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2022 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.050

Review 10.  What are the clinical effects of the different emergency department imaging options for suspected renal colic? A scoping review.

Authors:  Erik Doty; Stephen DiGiacomo; Bridget Gunn; Lauren Westafer; Elizabeth Schoenfeld
Journal:  J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open       Date:  2021-06-16
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.