RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Tomografía Computarizada Espiral , Cálculos Ureterales/diagnóstico por imagen , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Hospitales , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Derivación y Consulta , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Reino Unido , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
AIM: To establish whether non-contrast enhanced computed tomography (NCCT) renders the kidneys-ureters-bladder (KUB) radiograph redundant as the initial imaging investigation for suspected acute ureteric colic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The imaging investigations for 120 patients consecutively admitted to an emergency department-led clinical decisions unit (CDU) with suspected acute ureteric colic were retrospectively reviewed. A multidisciplinary meeting reviewed the findings and recommended that KUB radiographs should not be routinely performed prior to NCCT. Prospective assessment of 116 consecutive patients admitted over a comparable period was then undertaken. RESULTS: In the retrospective group, 61 (50.8%) patients had calculi to account for symptoms (positive NCCT) and 59 (49.2%) patients did not have stone disease (negative NCCT). Ninety (75%) patients had a KUB radiograph prior to NCCT. However, in 46 (38% of total) of these patients the NCCT was negative for stones, and therefore, they had been subjected to an unnecessary radiographic examination. These results prompted a change in practice. In the subsequent and prospectively studied group, preliminary KUB radiographs were performed in only 6% of the patients, with no significant change in the positive NCCT rate (50.8 versus 51.7%) or the total number of examinations performed (120 versus 116). CONCLUSION: NCCT should be the initial imaging examination for acute ureteric colic. Up to 50% of patients with clinical suspicion do not have stone disease, and therefore, preliminary KUB radiographs with attendant radiation and cost implications are unjustified. Preliminary KUB radiographs can be omitted from the imaging pathway with no resultant indication creep or increase in demand for NCCT examinations.