Acoustic shadowing in pediatric kidney stone ultrasound: a retrospective study with non-enhanced computed tomography as reference standard

Radiation exposure associated with computed tomography for pediatric urolithiasis evaluation: A scoping review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Computed tomography (CT) imaging is used for assessment of pediatric urolithiasis in cases where ultrasound is inconclusive. The utility of CT imaging must be considered alongside the potential risks of radiation exposure in this patient population due to the increased risk of cancer development. The purpose of this review is to investigate the radiation exposure associated with standard-dose and low-dose computed tomography (CT) imaging for the assessment of pediatric urolithiasis.

METHODS

A scoping literature review over a 23 year period between 2000 and 2023 was conducted of all English-language studies reporting on the use of non-contrast CT imaging for assessment of pediatric urolithiasis. Patients that were specified as pediatric with age ≤20 years at time of intervention and undergoing standard-dose or low/ultra-low-dose CT were included. Low-dose and ultra-low-dose CT were defined as a radiation dose ≤3.0 mSv and ≤1.9 mSv, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 8121 articles were identified and after screening, 6 articles representing 309 patients were included in this scoping review. Of the articles reviewed, standard non-contrast CT radiation doses for pediatric urolithiasis evaluation ranged from 2.9 to 5.5 mSv and low-dose CT radiation dose was reported to be 1.0-2.72 mSv. Only 2 studies directly evaluated low-dose CT imaging compared to standard-dose CT imaging for pediatric urolithiasis assessment. Radiation reduction approaches did not negatively impact urolithiasis detection or characterization in 2 studies reviewed.

CONCLUSIONS

CT radiation doses for suspected or known pediatric urolithiasis are underreported and vary greatly with underutilization of low-dose/ultra-dose protocols for pediatric urolithiasis especially in comparison to the adult population. Results from this scoping review support that low-dose CTprotocols for pediatric stone disease are feasible to reduce radiation exposure.

Diagnostic accuracy of Doppler twinkling artifact for identifying urolithiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to perform a comprehensive meta-analysis to assess the overall diagnostic value of Doppler twinkling for the diagnosis of urolithiasis.

METHODS

We systematically searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from inception through May 31, 2021. Studies including patients with urolithiasis who underwent color flow Doppler sampling to highlight the twinkling artifact and computed tomography were included. Diagnostic test meta-analysis was performed with a bivariate model. We used summary receiver operating characteristic curves to summarize the overall diagnostic performance. The weighted sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio were calculated.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies involving 4572 patients were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The weighted sensitivity was 0.86 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-0.94), specificity 0.92 (95% CI 0.75-0.98), positive likelihood ratio 11.3, negative likelihood ratio 0.2, and diagnostic odds ratio 75.5.

CONCLUSION

The Doppler twinkling artifact has good diagnostic value for the diagnosis of urolithiasis and should be used as a complementary tool in the diagnosis of urolithiasis.

Identification of Clinically Insignificant Renal Calculi on Sonography

OBJECTIVE

To determine factors predicting if a radiologists... report of a .. stone... on ultrasound (US) was not actually a clinically significant stone, based on subsequent computed tomogram (CT). US often overestimates stone size and various pathologic entities are also hyperechoic;.ßthus, a subsequent CT without a clinically significant stone may represent unnecessary radiation exposure. A decision-tree and nomogram were developed to predict when stones are unlikely on subsequent CT.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients, of any age, receiving CT within 24.ßhours of a sonographic report documenting a single renal stone, during 2019...2020, in any phase of care, at one institution. Novel stone-likelihood-systems for US and CT (US-SLS, CT-SLS) were devised and validated to classify stones as clinically significant or insignificant, with CT as the gold standard. Binomial logistic regression predicting clinically significant stones was performed with sonographic and patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Eight hundred twenty patients had US followed by CT, 228 (27.8%) reported documented stones, 140 (17.1%) reported a single stone. Clinically significant stones were associated with larger stone size (P: .002), location (P: .002), hydronephrosis (P: .04), shadowing-artifact (P: .02) depth.ßto.ßstone (P: .008), and Body mass Index (BMI) (P: .01). US-SLS had higher sensitivity (95.4%) and negative-predictive-value (81.8%) compared to a multivariate model of significant variables.

CONCLUSION

US-SLS appears to exclude clinically irrelevant .. stones... better than established criteria including twinkle or shadow in this retrospective analysis. A diagnostic algorithm and nomogram are presented. US-SLS and the associated decision tree can assist providers in avoiding unnecessary radiation when clinically significant stones are unlikely.

Shockwaves and the Rolling Stones: An Overview of Pediatric Stone Disease

Urinary stone disease is a common problem in adults, with an estimated 10% to 20% lifetime risk of developing a stone and an annual incidence of almost 1%. In contrast, in children, even though the incidence appears to be increasing, urinary tract stones are a rare problem, with an estimated incidence of approximately 5 to 36 per 100,000 children. Consequently, typical complications of rare diseases, such as delayed diagnosis, lack of awareness, and specialist knowledge, as well as difficulties accessing specific treatments also affect children with stone disease. Indeed, because stone disease is such a common problem in adults, frequently, it is adult practitioners who will first be asked to manage affected children. Yet, there are unique aspects to pediatric urolithiasis such that treatment practices common in adults cannot necessarily be transferred to children. Here, we review the epidemiology, etiology, presentation, investigation, and management of pediatric stone disease; we highlight those aspects that separate its management from that in adults and make a case for a specialized, multidisciplinary approach to pediatric stone disease.

Twinkle artifact in renal ultrasound, is it a solid point for the diagnosis of renal stone in children?

Background: Twinkle artifact, also known as color Doppler comet-tail artifact, occurs behind very strong, granular, and irregular reflecting interfaces such as crystals, stones, or calcification. This is visualized as a random mixture of red and blue pixels in the high-frequency shift spectrum located deep to the interface. Study results have suggested that the sonographic twinkling artifact may aid in the detection of renal stones with a variety of reference standard imaging modalities, including abdominal radiography, excretory urography, gray-scale sonography, and CT. Material and methods: Our retrospective observational study included children who had undergone abdomen/renal ultrasound for kidneys stones in our radiology department between 2013 and 2019. Presence of the twinkle artifact, and stone numbers and sizes were documented. CT examinations done <3 months prior to or after US were retrospectively assessed to confirm the presence of kidney stones as a reference standard. Results: Thirty-three abdominal renal US scans of 33 patients (21 males, 12 females) fulfilled the entry criteria. The interval between the US and CT was <3 months for all patients. The median overall age of the patients was 4 years (IQR: 3.125, range: 1- 165 months), The median number of days between the US and CT was 13 (IQR: 26, range: 0-81 days). US detected 33 hyperechoic foci suspected to be stones; 26 were confirmed as true positive (i.e. showed the twinkle artifact and were seen in CT), 4 were false positive (showed the twinkle artifact but were not seen in CT), and 3 were false negative (did not show the twinkle artifact but were seen in CT). The overall median stone size was 2 mm in the right kidney, and 5 mm in the left kidney (IQR: 6,11 mm), respectively. Twinkle artifact sensitivity was found to be 89.7% (95% CI 39.574%-90%). The twinkle artifact was assessed in all true-positive stones, determining a relatively high PPV of 26/29 (86.7%) for the twinkle artifact. The twinkle artifact was not dependent on stone size. Specificity for the twinkle artifact could not be calculated due to a lack of true negatives. Conclusion: The twinkle artifact is a sensitive US tool for detecting pediatric kidney and ureter stones, but with a small risk of false positive findings.

Does twinkle artifact truly represent a kidney stone on renal ultrasound?

INTRODUCTION

Nephrolithiasis is detected on ultrasound by the presence of an echogenic focus, posterior acoustic shadowing and/or twinkle artifact (TA). TA has been shown to be highly predictive of nephrolithiasis in adults with renal colic and ureteral stones. We sought to evaluate if TA is reliable for diagnosing nephrolithiasis in the pediatric population.

METHODS

We reviewed renal ultrasound reports indicating presence or absence of TA associated with a single echogenic focus in the kidney or ureter. Exclusion criteria were age >18, multiple echogenic foci or medullary calcinosis, no follow-up, or TA located outside the kidney or ureter. Stone was confirmed either by CT within 3 months of color Doppler ultrasound, visualization on ureteroscopy, or patient report of passing the stone.

RESULTS

Five hundred and ninety-nine ultrasound reports were reviewed and 293 met inclusion criteria. Sixty-nine had diffuse twinkle without echogenic focus and 224 showed TA with single echogenic focus. 135 patients had confirmatory information available (Summary Table). Nephrolithiasis was diagnosed using TA and confirmed on confirmatory studies for 49 ultrasounds. The majority of confirmed stones were in the kidney (n = 40; 82%) and mean size of confirmed stones on ultrasound was 5 mm (range 1.5-10). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of TA for detecting nephrolithiasis were 83%, 78%, 74% and 86% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to the adult literature, TA in children has lower sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value, but similar negative predictive value for diagnosing nephrolithiasis. This may be related to renal location and smaller stone size. The presence of TA should be weighed in the setting of other clinical and radiographic evidence of nephrolithiasis.