Toru Kameda1, Kumiko Uebayashi2, Kazuko Wagai3, Fukiko Kawai2, Nobuyuki Taniguchi4. 1. Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, Saiseikai Utsunomiya Hospital, 911-1 Takebayashi, Utsunomiya, Tochigi, 321-0974, Japan. kamekame@pb3.so-net.ne.jp. 2. Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, Saiseikai Utsunomiya Hospital, 911-1 Takebayashi, Utsunomiya, Tochigi, 321-0974, Japan. 3. Department of Clinical Laboratory, Saiseikai Utsunomiya Hospital, Utsunomiya, Japan. 4. Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, Jichi Medical University, Shimotsuke, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the performance of a pocket-sized ultrasound device (PUD) for evaluating dilatation of the renal collecting system with high-end ultrasound devices (HUDs) as a reference standard. METHODS: One sonographer examined both kidneys using a PUD to evaluate dilatation of the collecting system. The grading of the dilatation ranged from 0 to 4. Immediately after the examination, another sonographer blinded to the previous results performed a formal examination with a HUD. RESULTS: Two hundred kidneys in 100 patients were included in the analysis. The agreement of grades between the PUD and HUDs was excellent (weighted kappa = 0.83; P < 0.001). When hydronephrosis was defined as grade 1 or higher, the test characteristics of the PUD were as follows: sensitivity 91% (95% confidence interval (CI) 79-97%), positive predictive value 73% (95% CI 60-83%), and negative predictive value 96% (95% CI 92-99%). When hydronephrosis was defined as grade 2 or higher, the test characteristics were as follows: sensitivity 88% (95% CI 73-97%), positive predictive value 75% (95% CI 59-87%), and negative predictive value 98% (95% CI 94-99%). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound using a PUD is useful for evaluating dilatation of the collecting system, especially for ruling out its presence.
PURPOSE: To assess the performance of a pocket-sized ultrasound device (PUD) for evaluating dilatation of the renal collecting system with high-end ultrasound devices (HUDs) as a reference standard. METHODS: One sonographer examined both kidneys using a PUD to evaluate dilatation of the collecting system. The grading of the dilatation ranged from 0 to 4. Immediately after the examination, another sonographer blinded to the previous results performed a formal examination with a HUD. RESULTS: Two hundred kidneys in 100 patients were included in the analysis. The agreement of grades between the PUD and HUDs was excellent (weighted kappa = 0.83; P < 0.001). When hydronephrosis was defined as grade 1 or higher, the test characteristics of the PUD were as follows: sensitivity 91% (95% confidence interval (CI) 79-97%), positive predictive value 73% (95% CI 60-83%), and negative predictive value 96% (95% CI 92-99%). When hydronephrosis was defined as grade 2 or higher, the test characteristics were as follows: sensitivity 88% (95% CI 73-97%), positive predictive value 75% (95% CI 59-87%), and negative predictive value 98% (95% CI 94-99%). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound using a PUD is useful for evaluating dilatation of the collecting system, especially for ruling out its presence.
Authors: Adrienne N Malik; Jonathan Rowland; Brian D Haber; Stephanie Thom; Bradley Jackson; Bryce Volk; Robert R Ehrman Journal: Curr Emerg Hosp Med Rep Date: 2021-05-11