Alternatives to the baseline KUB for CTKUB-detected calculi: evaluation of CT scout and average and maximum intensity projection images

The proportion of computed tomography kidneys, ureters and bladder (CTKUB) scans that comply with scan extent protocol in an emergency department: a clinical audit and dose ramification study

INTRODUCTION

To assess computed tomography kidneys, ureters and bladder (CTKUB) scan extent protocol compliance and associated doses in the Emergency Department (ED) of an Australian tertiary hospital.

METHODS

A retrospective clinical audit of 150 consecutive ED CTKUB cases was completed. For each patient, scan extent compliance at the superior (kidneys) and inferior (pubic symphysis) borders, in reference to the protocol was recorded. Compliance and non-compliance (over-/under-scanning) was identified, described (superior/inferior), quantified (via IMPAX measurements) and recorded via a purpose-built audit tool. In addition, a PBU40 phantom was scanned to assess the percentage of dose (DLP) increase per centimetre of over-scanning to contextualise results.

RESULTS

A notable non-compliance with department protocol was noted. Eight cases (5.3%) demonstrated overall CT scan extent compliance. The remaining 142 cases (94.7%) demonstrated some form of non-compliance; superiorly, inferiorly or both. Analysing the 150 superior and 150 inferior data points independently, the most common non-compliance was over-scanning at the kidneys by 4 cm to5 cm (19 cases, ~10% extra DLP) beyond tolerance and over-scanning inferiorly at the pubic symphysis by 1 cm to 2 cm (29 cases, ~6.4% extra DLP). Estimated dose increases of up to 35% to 45% were found when clinical audit results were simulated using a PBU40.

CONCLUSIONS

Over-scanning is a predominant occurrence in CTKUB scans in this department. Reasons for over-scanning weren't investigated. It's anticipated this audit will lead to greater awareness of scan extent compliance and dose ramifications of non-compliance. The usage of more easily identified anatomical landmarks and a follow-up audit is suggested.

Ray sum image: its efficacy in renal tract calculus detection

AIM

To determine the efficacy of a ray sum image derived from computed tomography of the kidneys, ureters and bladder (CT KUB) in detecting renal tract calculi and whether this can replace the baseline abdominal radiograph (AXR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study performed at a tertiary referral centre examining adult patients referred for urolithiasis who had undergone AXR within 24 hours of the diagnostic CT KUB. AXR and ray sum image for calculus visibility were reviewed blindly by two readers. Anteroposterior thickness of the patient, presence of excess gas/faecal material, calculus size, location, and mean attenuation were analysed to determine effect on the AXR and ray sum sensitivity.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-two calculi were examined with ray sum image sensitivity of 44% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 36-52) and AXR 30% (95% CI: 22-38). Calculus size and mean attenuation significantly affected sensitivities of both ray sum and AXR. There was substantial agreement between the two techniques with κ(Kappa)=0.70 (95% CI: 0.58-0.81, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Ray sum image as a post-processed image derived from CT KUB dataset may be a viable alternative to the baseline AXR in patients with CT proven urolithiasis. This would reduce patient radiation dose and streamline workflow in busy radiology and emergency departments.