3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Renal colic: A prospective evaluation of non-enhanced spiral CT versus intravenous pyelography

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Diagnosis of acute flank pain: value of unenhanced helical CT.

          The purpose of our study was to determine the value of unenhanced CT in the diagnosis of acute flank pain. We determined the accuracy of unenhanced Ct for stone detection as well as the detection of abnormalities unrelated to stone disease. During an 18-month interval, 292 patients with acute flank pain were imaged with unenhanced CT. Confirmation of the CT diagnosis was obtained for 210 patients: One hundred patients were proved to have ureteral stones based on other imaging studies (58 patients), lithotripsy (seven patients), ureteroscopic stone extraction (five patients), and stone recovery (30 patients). One hundred ten patients were proved not to have ureteral stones based on other imaging studies (24 patients), failure to recover a stone (56 patients), or a confirmed diagnosis unrelated to stone disease (30 patients). This latter group of 30 patients included diagnoses of adnexal masses (eight patients), appendicitis (five patients), diverticulitis (four patients), and common bile duct stones (three patients), as well as other diagnoses. Unenhanced CT findings were falsely negative for stone disease in three patients and falsely positive for stone disease in four patients. These data yield a sensitivity of 97%, a specificity of 96%, and an accuracy of 97% for diagnosing ureteral stone disease. Of 31 patients with a CT abnormality unrelated to stone disease, there was one false-negative diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Unenhanced CT is a valuable technique for examining patients with acute flank pain in whom a clinical diagnosis is uncertain. It can accurately determine the presence or absence of ureteral stones as well as extraurinary causes of acute flank pain. In most cases, other imaging studies are not required.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The value of unenhanced helical computerized tomography in the management of acute flank pain.

            We developed an algorithm using unenhanced computerized tomography (CT) for the management of acute flank pain and suspected ureteral obstruction. During a 25-month interval 417 patients with acute flank pain underwent unenhanced helical CT. The final diagnosis was confirmed by additional imaging or clinical followup. For all patients who underwent additional imaging studies the official dictated radiology reports were used to determine whether the studies were recommended based on CT findings. Cases requiring intervention were evaluated to determine whether additional imaging was performed before the procedure. Medical records were reviewed and/or patients were interviewed to document the course of therapy and long-term outcome. Unenhanced helical CT diagnosed ureteral stone disease with 95% sensitivity, 98% specificity and 97% accuracy. Of the 38 patients requiring intervention, including nephrostomy catheters in 18, lithotripsy in 3 and ureteroscopic stone extraction in 7, additional imaging (excretory urography) was performed in only 1. Additional imaging studies generated by CT were done in 3 cases in which the dictated reports were indeterminate for ureteral stones, including negative excretory urography in 2 and retrograde urography in 1. In 1 patient in whom CT misdiagnosed a ureteral stone unnecessary retrograde urography revealed the calcification to be a gonadal vein phlebolith. Seven patients with false-negative examinations reported spontaneous stone passage with no complications. Unenhanced helical CT accurately determines the presence or absence of ureterolithiasis in patients with acute flank pain. CT precisely identifies stone size and location. When ureterolithiasis is absent, other causes of acute flank pain can be identified. In most cases additional imaging is not required.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Spiral computerized tomography in the evaluation of acute flank pain: a replacement for excretory urography.

              We determined the value of noncontrast enhanced spiral computerized tomography (CT) in the evaluation of suspected renal colic. Thin section (5 mm.) noncontrast enhanced CT was used to evaluate 100 patients presenting to the emergency room with flank pain. The 55 patients with ureteral obstruction were followed at the urology outpatient clinic and by telephone interview, while 45 without ureteral obstruction were followed by telephone interview and chart review. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for CT were determined, with passage, retrieval or identification of a stone on a retrograde study considered the gold standard for diagnosis. A total of 89 patients had adequate clinical followup to assess outcome accurately. Of 55 patients with ureteral obstruction on CT 11 underwent endoscopic stone removal, while 44 were treated conservatively with stone passage documented in 39. Of the 45 patients without ureteral stones identified 38 did not pass calculi and CT provided a definite diagnosis in 14. There was 1 false-negative study. The results yielded 98% sensitivity, 100% specificity, and 100% positive and 97% negative predictive values. Noncontrast enhanced spiral CT was accurate and reliable in detecting obstructing ureteral calculi in patients with flank pain.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Australasian Radiology
                Australas Radiol
                Wiley
                0004-8461
                1440-1673
                March 2003
                March 2003
                : 47
                : 1
                : 22-28
                Article
                10.1046/j.1440-1673.2003.t01-2-01125.x
                20b1920f-5467-4f89-86fc-b024b73fd233
                © 2003

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article