Sensitivity and value of digital CT scout radiography for detecting ureteral stones in patients with ureterolithiasis diagnosed on unenhanced CT

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.

"Stoneless" or Negative Ureteroscopy: A Reality in the Endourologic Routine or Avoidable Source of Frustration? Estimating the Risk Factors for a Negative Ureteroscopy

INTRODUCTION

A "Negative" ureteroscopy (URS) is defined as a URS in which no stone is found during the procedure. It may occur when the stone has already been passed spontaneously or when it is located outside the collecting system. The aim of the study was to outline risk factors for Negative-URS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the possible risk factors for Negative-URS from a database of 341 URS cases. In every case where presumptive ureteral stone was not found, a formal nephroscopy as well as a whole collecting system revision was completed. The Negative-URS group was compared with the non-Negative-URS group, in terms of patient and stone characteristics.

RESULTS

The database of 341 URS cases included 448 different stone instances, of which 17 (3.8%) were negative and 431 (96.2%) were therapeutic. There was no statistical significant difference between the two groups concerning age, body mass index, stone location in the ureter, stone laterality, and whether the patient was prestented. The stepwise multiple logistic regression revealed three important risk factors, namely CT stone surface area (p < 0.0001), radiopacity of the stone at kidney, ureter, and bladder radiograph (KUB; p = 0.0004), and gender (p = 0.0011) with an area under the curve of 0.91. Women were found to have more possibilities to have a negative procedure by four- to sevenfold than men depending on the model. A nonradio-opaque stone at KUB is more likely to be correlated with a Negative-URS by 9.5- to 11-fold more than a radiopaque stone at KUB. For each increase of 1 U in CT stone surface area, there is an increase of 10%-12% to be non-negative.

CONCLUSIONS

Female gender, a nonradio-opaque stone at KUB, and a smaller stone surface were statistically significantly different in the Negative-URS population.

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

PURPOSE

A CT of the kidneys, ureters, and bladder (CTKUB) is the investigation of choice in suspected renal colic. Plain kidney, ureter, and bladder radiographs (KUB) can be used to monitor the progress of a stone if radiographically visible on a baseline KUB. This study aims to determine if a low-dose CT Scout, thick-slab average intensity projection (AIP), or maximum intensity projection (MIP) images are suitable as substitutes for a baseline KUB.

METHOD

A retrospective review of patients from a tertiary adult institute that had a positive CTKUB and a KUB within 4 h of the CT was performed. Two consultant radiologists independently reviewed the KUB, CT Scout, AIP, and MIP for stone visibility and their sensitivities and agreement values were compared. Stone characteristics (size, location, and peak Hounsfield units) and patient thickness were recorded and examined for any association with discordant results.

RESULTS

74 stones were evaluated for the study. KUB had a sensitivity of 66.2% (95% CI 54.3-76.8), CT Scout 47.3% (95% CI 35.6-59.3), AIP 55.4% (95% CI 43.4-67.0), and MIP 83.8% (95% CI 73.4-91.3). Fair agreement was found between the KUB and both CT Scout (κ=0.363, 95% CI 0.167-0.558) and AIP (κ=0.384, 95% CI 0.175-0.592). Moderate agreement was found between the KUB and MIP (κ=0.412, 95% CI 0.198-0.625). Neither any stone characteristic nor patient thickness had a significant association with discordant results.

CONCLUSION

None of the possible substitutes for a baseline KUB showed strong agreement with the KUB. Low-dose CT Scouts have a similar sensitivity to the published literature for higher dose CT Scouts.

Kidney stones and imaging: what can your radiologist do for you?

OBJECTIVES

We discuss in this review, urologists' expectations of imaging in terms of detection, characterization, pre-planning treatment and follow-up of urinary stones.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data acquisition regarding kidney stones and imaging was performed using MEDLINE searches with combinations of the following keywords: urinary stones, CT Urography, low dose CT, MRI urography, renal stones ultrasound, conventional radiography, surgery.

RESULTS

CT has become the gold standard for the evaluation of urinary stones. Scanning provides information regarding stone (composition, size, burden, location), collecting system and renal parenchyma. Those findings are crucial in determining appropriate treatment strategies. Because CT exposes the patient to substantial ionizing radiation, efforts have already been made to decrease the CT radiation dose for CT examination (low dose CT) and optimize image quality. Efforts also are being made to use non ionizing modalities such as ultrasound in combination with radiography particularly for the follow up of renal stones.

CONCLUSION

CT is the preferred method for the evaluation and treatment planning of urolithiasis. CT radiation dose reduction can be achieved with low dose CT. However, conventional radiography and ultrasound are still recommended in the follow up of renal stones.

Use of computed tomography scout film and Hounsfield unit of computed tomography scan in predicting the radio-opacity of urinary calculi in plain kidney, ureter and bladder radiographs

Objective:

The objective of this study is to determine the diagnostic utility of computed tomography (CT)- scout film with an optimal non-contrast helical CT scan Hounsfield unit (HU) in predicting the appearance of urinary calculus in the plain kidneys, ureter, urinary bladder (KUB)-radiograph.

Methods:

A prospective cross-sectional study was executed and data were collected from June 2007 to June 2012 at a tertiary hospital. The included subjects were diagnosed to have <10mm urolithiasis with non-contrast helical CT scan and KUB X-ray, which were carried out on the same day. Both KUB radiographs and CT-scout film were read by two qualified radiologists with inter-observer standardization prior to the study. Urolithiasis characteristics such as stone location, CT attenuation value, CT-scout film and KUB radiograph appearance were recorded independently by two observers. Univariate logistic analysis with receiver operating characteristic curve was generated to determine the best cut-off HU value of urolithiases not identified in CT-scout film, but determined radio-opaque in KUB X-ray. Subsequently, its sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios were calculated. Statistical significance was set at P value of 0.05 or less.

Results:

Two hundred and three valid cases were included. 73 out of 75 CT-scout film detected urolithiasis were identified on plain radiograph and determined as radio-opaque. The determined best cut off value of HU utilized for prediction of radiographic characteristics was 630HU at which urinary calculi were not seen at CT-scout film and were KUB X-ray radio-opaque. The set HU cut-off was established of ideal accuracy with an overall sensitivity of 82.2%, specificity of 96.9% and a positive predictive value of 96.5% and negative predictive value of 83.5%.

Conclusion:

Urolithiases identified on the CT-scout film were also seen as radiopaque on the KUB radiograph while those stones not visible on the CT-scout film, but above the optimal HU cut-off value of 630 are also likely to be radiopaque.

The CT scout view: does it need to be routinely reviewed as part of the CT interpretation?

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to determine whether the CT scout view should be routinely reviewed by comparing diagnostic information on the scout view with that provided by the correlative CT study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two radiologists blinded to history and CT findings reviewed retrospectively 2032 scout views. All cases with major findings (defined as any abnormality that would prompt additional diagnostic tests or require management) were correlated with the CT study, other imaging study, or medical record when necessary by a third radiologist to determine the validity of the scout view finding and whether the finding was identifiable on the current CT study.

RESULTS

Major findings were identified in 257 (13%, reader 1) and 436 (23%, reader 2) of cases. Most major findings were confirmed (69-78%) or refuted (13-16%) by the CT study. However, 15 (6%, reader 1) and 48 (11%, reader 2) of the major findings were not included in the CT FOV, of which five (2%, reader 1) and 21 (5%, reader 2) constituted a missed pathologic finding. The most common one was cardiomegaly detected on a nonchest CT scout view. Additional pathologic findings included fracture, metastasis, avascular necrosis or subluxation of the humeral head, dilated bowel, and thoracic aortic dilatation. The most common false-positive finding was cardiomegaly.

CONCLUSION

In a small percentage of cases, review of the CT scout view will disclose significant pathologic findings not included in the CT FOV. The results of this study support the routine inspection of the scout view, especially for the detection of pathologic findings in anatomic regions not imaged by CT.

Evaluation of the sensitivity of scout radiographs on unenhanced helical CT in identifying ureteric calculi: a large UK tertiary referral centre experience

OBJECTIVE

Unenhanced helical CT for kidney, ureter and bladder (CT KUB) has become the standard investigation for renal colic. This study aims to determine the sensitivity of scout radiographs in detecting ureteric calculi using CT KUB as a standard reference.

METHODS

A retrospective review of consecutive patients who presented with acute flank pain and were investigated using CT KUB. 201 patients with positive ureteric calculi were included. Two radiologists independently reviewed the scout radiographs with access to CT KUB images. Each observer recorded the presence or absence of calculi, location, size and mean Hounsfield units of each calculus.

RESULTS

203 ureteric calculi were analysed from 201 patients. The overall sensitivity of scout radiographs for Observer A was 42.3% and for Observer B 52.2%, with an interobserver reliability κ-value of 0.78. The significance of mean Hounsfield units and size between two groups of patients with visible stones and those not visible were tested; the p-value for both variables was <0.0001, which is statistically significant. The study found that calculi in the upper ureter and larger than 4 mm are more likely to be seen on the scout radiograph.

CONCLUSIONS

Usage of CT scout radiography should be encouraged and reported routinely in conjunction with CT KUB as a baseline for treatment follow-up.

Digital tomosynthesis in the detection of urolithiasis: Diagnostic performance and dosimetry compared with digital radiography with MDCT as the reference standard

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of digital tomosynthesis in comparison with digital radiography in the detection of urinary stones with MDCT as the reference standard.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Fifty consecutively enrolled patients (32 men, 18 women; mean age, 51.5 years; range, 19-83 years) referred for unenhanced MDCT of the abdomen with suspicion of urinary stones also underwent digital tomosynthesis and digital radiography (anteroposterior and bladder inlet views). Images from all examinations were randomly read by three blinded radiologists. The mean effective doses for digital tomosynthesis, digital radiography, and low- and high-dose MDCT were measured on a male phantom. Free-response receiver operating characteristics and receiver operating characteristics analyses were used to compare the diagnostic performance of digital radiography with that of digital tomosynthesis.

RESULTS

Both types of analysis showed significantly better performance of tomosynthesis over digital radiography for all urinary stones (p < 0.05). No such improvement was found for ureteral stones. The gain in sensitivity with tomosynthesis was largest for stones between 2 and 5 mm in diameter. The mean effective dose was 0.5 mSv for digital radiography, 0.85 mSv for tomosynthesis, 2.5 mSv for low-dose MDCT, and 12.6 mSv for high-dose MDCT.

CONCLUSION

Use of digital tomosynthesis of the abdomen results in improved detection of urinary stones in general over digital radiography with only a slight increase in effective dose. Use of tomosynthesis, however, was not associated with major improvement in the diagnosis of ureteral stones. The technique has potential as an alternative imaging technique in the detection and follow-up of urinary stones.

Investigations for recognizing urinary stone

This study was done to identify the value of the commonly performed investigations available for identifying urinary stone disease, namely X-ray of the kidney, ureter and bladder (KUB) regions and ultrasound scan (USS) to recognize stones in patients suspected to have the disease. Two hundred patients who attended the stone clinic with symptoms suggestive of urinary stone disease and had either stone retrieved or have been followed up for minimum of 6 months were interviewed. The final opinion on stone disease was made after follow-up to assess the efficacy of the initial opinion based on the plain X-ray KUB or USS. The patients were classified as proved stone patients only after retrieval of stones. The efficacy of the initial screening investigation was assessed to calculate the specificity and sensitivity of the two modalities of investigation. Of the 200 patients studied, all had plain X-ray KUB. Only 166 patients had USS for recognizing stones in the urinary tract; 74 patients showed positive evidence of stones either by X-ray or USS. The findings of the two modalities of investigation are given below. Number of X-rays done, 200; number positive, 24; proved positive, 24 (stone retrieved); proved negative, 0; number negative, 176; proved positive, 32 (stone retrieved); proved negative, 144; number of USS done, 166; number positive, 120; proved positive, 50 (stone retrieved); proved negative, 70; number negative, 46; proved positive, 14 (stone retrieved); proved negative, 32. USS showed back presence effects in 62 patients. Of these, 12% showed stones in the ureter, whereas the rest did not show evidence of stones. Those selected as positive stones finally had either passed stones or had PCNL, URS, cystolithotripsy or open surgery or were put on high-dose chemotherapy. Forty-six patients who had no ROS in KUB and no stones in USS passed stones subsequently. It is concluded that the plain both X-ray KUB and USS should be performed in patients with suspected stone disease for identifying stone disease and also to exclude other pathology which may produce similar urinary symptoms.

Useful prediction of ureteral calculi visibility on abdominal radiographs based on calculi characteristics on unenhanced helical CT and CT scout radiographs

AIMS

To determine whether visibility of ureteral calculi on plain radiographs of the kidney, ureter and bladder (KUB) could be predicted based on characteristics on unenhanced helical computed tomography (UHCT) and CT scout radiographs (CTSR).

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-three patients diagnosed with 140 ureteral calculi on UHCT, had undergone both UHCT and KUB within 24 h and before calculus passage or intervention were included. The visibility of ureteral calculi on KUB and CTSR as well as their sizes, locations and densities on UHCT were recorded. The association of CTSR/UHCT characteristics of ureteral calculi and their visibility on KUB were analysed. Multivariate analyses using logistic regression were computed as predictors for visibility on KUB.

RESULTS

Of the 140 calculi, 56 (40%) and 98 (70%) were visible on CTSR and KUB respectively. All calculi detectable on CTSR were also visible on KUB. Multivariate analyses of the 84 CTSR undetectable calculi revealed that non-middle ureteral location and higher calculi densities on UHCT were significant predictors of visibility on KUB. All non-middle ureteral calculi with density > 800 Hounsfield units (HU) were visible on KUB. Of 23 calculi in the middle ureter or with density < 200 HU, 17 (74%) were invisible on KUB.

CONCLUSIONS

Ureteral calculi characteristics on UHCT and CTSR are useful for predicting their visibility on KUB. Patients with visible calculi on CTSR or non-middle ureteral calculi with density > 800 HU are suitable for KUB to follow-up calculi status.

Acute Flank Pain Secondary to Urolithiasis: Radiologic Evaluation and Alternate Diagnoses

This article discusses the radiologic management of the patient who has acute flank pain. It describes the evolution of radiologic imaging in patients who present with acute symptoms caused by suspected urolithiasis, the advantages of unenhanced helical CT and the limitations of abdominal radiography, intravenous urography, and ultrasonography in this setting, and the alternative diagnoses encountered within the urinary tract, abdomen, and pelvis.

[Imaging of acute urinary obstruction: non-enhanced CT or KUB and US]

The use of non-enhanced CT as a primary imaging technique for acute lumbar pain is now widely accepted in many centers instead of the traditional association of KUB and ultrasound. This review will present the different features of the disease according to each technique, emphasising on respective performances, advantages and disadvantages. Finally, a strategy will be proposed based on clinical presentation.

Urinary tract stones--Part I: role of radiological imaging in diagnosis and treatment planning

The modern management of urolithiasis requires a multi-disciplinary approach. Imaging plays a central role in both diagnosis and planning therapy of renal and ureteric calculi. This article reviews the current status of diagnosis and management of stone disease, and the contribution of radiological imaging in accurately triaging a given case to the most appropriate therapy.

Conspicuity of renal calculi at unenhanced CT: effects of calculus composition and size and CT technique

PURPOSE

To determine the effects of calculus size, composition, and technique (kilovolt and milliampere settings) on the conspicuity of renal calculi at unenhanced helical computed tomography (CT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors performed unenhanced CT of a phantom containing 188 renal calculi of varying size and chemical composition (brushite, cystine, struvite, weddellite, whewellite, and uric acid) at 24 combinations of four kilovolt (80-140 kV) and six milliampere (200-300 mA) levels. Two radiologists, who were unaware of the location and number of calculi, reviewed the CT images and recorded where stones were detected. These observations were compared with the known positions of calculi to generate true-positive and false-positive rates. Logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate the effects of stone size, composition, and technique and to generate probability estimates of detection. Interobserver agreement was estimated with kappa statistics.

RESULTS

Interobserver agreement was high: the mean kappa value for the two observers was 0.86. The conspicuity of stone fragments increased with increasing kilovolt and milliampere levels for all stone types. At the highest settings (140 kV and 300 mA), the detection threshold size (ie, the size of calculus that had a 50% probability of being detected) ranged from 0.81 mm + 0.03 (weddellite) to 1.3 mm + 0.1 (uric acid). Detection threshold size for each type of calculus increased up to 1.17-fold at lower kilovolt settings and up to 1.08-fold at lower milliampere settings.

CONCLUSION

The conspicuity of small renal calculi at CT increases with higher kilovolt and milliampere settings, with higher kilovolts being particularly important. Small uric acid calculi may be imperceptible, even with maximal CT technique.

Image quality and dose comparison among screen-film, computed, and CT scanned projection radiography: applications to CT urography

PURPOSE

To evaluate image quality and dose for abdominal imaging techniques that could be used as part of a computed tomographic (CT) urographic examination: screen-film (S-F) radiography or computed radiography (CR), performed with moving and stationary grids, and CT scanned projection radiography (CT SPR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An image quality phantom underwent imaging with moving and stationary grids with both a clinical S-F combination and CR plate. CT SPR was performed with six CT scanners at various milliampere second and kilovolt peak settings. Entrance skin exposure (ESE); spatial, contrast, and temporal resolutions; geometric accuracy; and artifacts were assessed.

RESULTS

S-F or CR images, with either grid, provided image quality equivalent to that with the clinical standard, S-F with a moving grid. ESE values for both S-F and CR were 435 mR (112.2 microC/kg [1 mR = 0.258 microC/kg]) with a moving grid and 226 mR (58.3 microC/kg) with a stationary grid. All CT SPR images provided inferior spatial resolution compared with S-F or CR images. High-contrast objects generated substantial artifacts on CT SPR images. Compared with S-F, CR and CT SPR provided improved resolution of small low-contrast objects. The contrast between iodine and soft-tissue-mimicking structures on CT SPR images acquired at 80 kVp was twice that at 120 kVp. CT SPR images with acceptable noise levels required a midline ESE value of approximately 300 mR (77.4 microC/kg) at 80 kVp.

CONCLUSION

S-F and CR provided better spatial resolution than did CT SPR. However, CT SPR provided improved low-contrast resolution compared with S-F, at exposures comparable to those used for S-F or CR.

Value of multislice helical CT scans and maximum-intensity-projection images to improve detection of ureteral stones at abdominal radiography

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the improvement in the detection of ureteral stones on abdominal radiographs when the stones were viewed on multislice helical CT scans and maximum-intensity-projection (MIP) images.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

The study included 72 patients with renal colic who underwent abdominal radiography and multislice helical CT. For each patient, a frontal MIP image was generated, and the stone, when present, was marked with a cross on the transverse CT scan. The cross appeared automatically on the corresponding MIP image. The CT examination was used as the standard of reference. The presence and location of ureteral stones on the abdominal radiographs were assessed during three interpretation sessions. In the first session, the abdominal radiographs were viewed alone. In the second, they were viewed with the transverse CT scans. In the third, the abdominal radiographs were viewed with the CT scans and the MIP images.

RESULTS

Ureteral stones were present in 58 patients. The percentage of stones detected on the abdominal radiographs was 45% when the radiographs were viewed alone, 66% when they were viewed with the CT scans (p = 0.002 vs radiographs alone), and 78% when viewed with the CT scans and MIP images (p = 0.016 vs radiographs with CT scans).

CONCLUSION

The sensitivity of stone detection on abdominal radiographs was greatest when the interpreters viewed the radiographs in conjunction with the CT scans and MIP images.

Urinary calculi on computed radiography: comparison of observer performance with hard-copy versus soft-copy images on different viewer systems

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare observer performance for detecting urinary calculi using abdominal computed radiography with hard-copy versus soft-copy images and with a high-resolution video monitor versus a liquid-crystal-display (LCD) monitor.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We compared observer performance for detecting urinary calculi using three sets of radiographs-hard-copy images, soft-copy images displayed on a LCD monitor (1280 x 1024 bits), and soft-copy images displayed on a high-resolution video monitor using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis with a continuous rating scale. Computed radiography was archived with a 2140 x 1760 pixel resolution and a 10-bit depth. The selected data set included 62 images: 27 images showing proven urinary calculi smaller than 6 mm and three in number, and 35 images containing no proven abnormalities. Eleven radiologists (three genitourinary radiologists and eight general radiologists) participated in the study. Interpretations of three sets of randomly distributed radiographs were performed individually in three separate sessions at 1-week intervals.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were found in the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for detecting urinary calculi or in the interpreting times between soft-copy and hard-copy images; the mean areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of hard-copy images, soft-copy images displayed on an LCD monitor, and soft-copy images displayed on a high-resolution video monitor were 0.579, 0.610, and 0.732, respectively. However, soft-copy images showed relatively improved diagnostic accuracy among less experienced radiologists (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

For detecting urinary calculi, soft-copy images offered a diagnostic accuracy similar to or slightly more accurate than that of hard-copy images obtained in a laser-printed film-based environment. The diagnostic performance with soft-copy images viewed on an LCD monitor was comparable to that of soft-copy images viewed on a high-resolution video monitor.

Abdominal radiography after CT reveals urinary calculi: a method to predict usefulness of abdominal radiography on the basis of size and CT attenuation of calculi

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine if the radiographic visibility of urinary tract calculi could be predicted on the basis of CT features.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The images of 26 patients whose urinary tract calculi were revealed on unenhanced helical CT and who also underwent digital abdominal radiography were retrospectively reviewed. CT features studied included size and CT attenuation of the calculi. These CT findings were correlated with the ability to detect the same calculi with radiography.

RESULTS

Forty-nine urinary tract calculi were detected with unenhanced helical CT in 26 patients. Twenty-six (53%) calculi were visible on radiography. Most (79%) calculi larger than 5 mm were detectable with radiography (p < 0.01). One (8%) of 13 calculi with CT attenuation below 200 H was detectable on radiographs. Ninety-five percent (21/22) of calculi with CT attenuation exceeding 300 H were visible on radiographs (p < 0.0001). The one remaining calculus was obscured by overlying anatomy.

CONCLUSION

Radiographic surveillance of urinary tract calculi detected with CT may not be useful if the calculi have a CT attenuation below 200 H. Most calculi larger than 5 mm and nearly all calculi with a CT attenuation exceeding 300 H can be seen on abdominal radiographs.

Unenhanced helical computed tomography for the evaluation of suspected renal colic in the adolescent population: a pilot study

OBJECTIVES

Unenhanced helical computed tomography (UHCT) is rapidly becoming the preferred imaging modality for the evaluation of suspected renal colic in the adult population; however, a series addressing its use in the adolescent population has not been previously published. We assessed the utility of UHCT in the evaluation of suspected renal colic in this age group.

METHODS

Seventeen patients between the ages of 8 and 18 years (mean 14.7) presented to the emergency departments of four hospitals for evaluation of suspected renal colic. All patients were studied with UHCT immediately after initial evaluation. A single helical acquisition was performed from the midpoint of T-12 vertebra to a point below the bladder base, using a slice thickness of 5 mm. Films were reviewed by the institutional radiologist, and results were quantified.

RESULTS

Of the 17 patients who underwent evaluation, no abnormality was detected in 8 patients. A stone was localized in 7 patients who were then appropriately treated. One patient had no stone visualized, but secondary signs suggested a recently passed stone. The final patient had no stone; however, marked bilateral hydroureteronephrosis was noted that led to further evaluation. A single phlebolith was seen in only 1 patient, and no study was nondiagnostic.

CONCLUSIONS

UHCT is a safe, rapidly performed test for the evaluation of suspected renal colic in adolescents. It is highly sensitive and specific for renal and ureteral calculi and, more importantly, allows visualization of alternate pathology. In addition, secondary signs are seen that aid in determining obstruction and are helpful if no stone is visualized. Phleboliths, which can simulate a stone, are rarely seen in adolescence. We believe UHCT allows for rapid triage and localization of stones and should be recommended as the primary diagnostic modality for the evaluation of adolescents with suspected renal colic.

Sensitivity of CT scout radiography and abdominal radiography for revealing ureteral calculi on helical CT: implications for radiologic follow-up

OBJECTIVE

We compared the sensitivity of CT scout radiography with that of abdominal radiography in revealing ureteral calculi on unenhanced helical CT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Over a 6-month period, patients presenting to the emergency department with acute flank pain were examined with standard abdominal radiography and unenhanced helical CT, which included CT scout radiography. In 60 patients in whom a diagnosis of ureteral calculus was made, CT scout radiographs and abdominal radiographs were examined by two interpreters who assessed whether stones could be visualized. All CT scout radiographs were viewed on a workstation using optimized window settings.

RESULTS

CT scout radiography and abdominal radiography revealed 28 (47%) and 36 (60%) of 60 ureteral calculi, respectively. All ureteral calculi that appeared on CT scout radiography also appeared on abdominal radiography. However, eight calculi that were visible on abdominal radiography were not visible on CT scout radiography. CT scout radiography and abdominal radiography revealed 28% and 46% of 39 calculi less than or equal to 3 mm in diameter, respectively. For 21 calculi larger than 3 mm, the sensitivity of CT scout radiography and abdominal radiography was 81% and 86%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Abdominal radiography is more sensitive than CT scout radiography in revealing ureteral calculi; however, some calculi revealed on unenhanced helical CT cannot be seen on either abdominal radiography or CT scout radiography. Ureteral calculi not visible on either study can only be followed, when necessary, with unenhanced helical CT.

Acute flank pain: a modern approach to diagnosis and management

Acute flank pain is a common and complex clinical problem. In addition to flank pain caused by ureterolithiasis, other urinary and extraurinary abnormalities can result in a similar clinical picture. Unenhanced CT can rapidly, accurately, and safely determine the presence or absence of ureteral obstruction. When obstruction is caused by ureterolithiasis, CT allows precise determination of stone size and location. These are the two most important factors used for patient management. In addition to direct stone visualization, there are many secondary CT signs of ureteral obstruction that are direct manifestations of the underlying pathophysiology. On the other hand, when obstruction is absent, CT can diagnose or exclude most other abnormalities that result in flank pain. As a result of its many advantages, unenhanced helical CT should become the dominant imaging modality for evaluation of all patients with acute flank pain in whom a clinical diagnosis is uncertain.