One year's clinical experience with unenhanced spiral computed tomography for the assessment of acute loin pain suggestive of renal colic

被引:32
作者
Greenwell, TJ
Woodhams, S
Denton, ERM
Mackenzie, A
Rankin, SC
Popert, R
机构
[1] Guys Hosp, Dept Urol, London SE1 9RT, England
[2] Guys Hosp, Dept Radiol, London SE1 9RT, England
[3] Guys Hosp, Dept Nucl Phys, London SE1 9RT, England
关键词
unenhanced spiral CT; intravenous urography; renal colic; clinical practice; effective radiation dose;
D O I
10.1046/j.1464-410x.2000.00605.x
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective To assess the use of unenhanced spiral computed tomography (CT) as the primary investigation of choice for suspected acute renal colic in clinical urological practice. Patients and Methods Between 1 August 1997 and 31 July 1998, all patients attending a hospital accident and emergency department with acute loin pain suggestive of renal colic underwent a physical examination, urine analysis, plain abdominal radiography (if clinically indicated) and unenhanced spiral CT. The effective radiation dose and financial cost of unenhanced spiral CT and standard three-film emergency intravenous urography (IVU) were calculated. Results In all, 116 patients were assessed, 63 of whom had calculi and related secondary phenomena of obstruction identified on unenhanced spiral CT. There were two false-positive and one false-negative result. An alternative urinary tract diagnosis was made in four patients, including two with renal cell carcinoma and one ureteric transitional cell carcinoma. Causes other than in the urinary tract were diagnosed in three patients, i.e. two with ovarian cyst and one with sigmoid diverticulitis. The effective radiation dose of unenhanced spiral CT was 4.7 mSa and that for three-film IVU was 1.5 mSv. The costs of both. IVU and unenhanced spiral CT were identical. Conclusions Unenhanced spiral CT allows a rapid, contrast-medium-free, anatomically accurate diagnosis of urinary tract calculi and in the present series had a sensitivity of 98% and a specificity of 97%. CT provided an alternative diagnosis in 6% of patients. These advantages must be weighed against the threefold greater radiation dose of unenhanced spiral CT than with three-film IVU, and in practice the requirement for a radiologist to interpret routine axial scans.
引用
收藏
页码:632 / 636
页数:5
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], ANN ICRP
[2]   ADVERSE REACTIONS TO CONTRAST AGENTS - SCOPE OF PROBLEM [J].
ANSELL, G .
INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 1990, 25 (04) :381-391
[3]   THE RISKS OF DEATH AND OF SEVERE NONFATAL REACTIONS WITH HIGH-OSMOLALITY VS LOW-OSMOLALITY CONTRAST-MEDIA - A METAANALYSIS [J].
CARO, JJ ;
TRINDADE, E ;
MCGREGOR, M .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1991, 156 (04) :825-832
[4]   Unenhanced helical CT for renal colic - is the radiation dose justifiable? [J].
Denton, ERE ;
Mackenzie, A ;
Greenwell, T ;
Popert, R ;
Rankin, SC .
CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 1999, 54 (07) :444-447
[5]   Spiral computerized tomography in the evaluation of acute flank pain: A replacement for excretory urography [J].
Fielding, JR ;
Steele, G ;
Fox, LA ;
Heller, H ;
Loughlin, KR .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1997, 157 (06) :2071-2073
[6]   MORTALITY DURING EXCRETORY UROGRAPHY - MAYO-CLINIC EXPERIENCE [J].
HARTMAN, GW ;
HATTERY, RR ;
WITTEN, DM ;
WILLIAMSON, B .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1982, 139 (05) :919-922
[7]  
IDSOE O, 1968, B WORLD HEALTH ORGAN, V38, P159
[8]   THE INTRODUCTION OF LOW-OSMOLAR CONTRAST AGENTS IN RADIOLOGY - MEDICAL, ECONOMIC, LEGAL, AND PUBLIC-POLICY ISSUES [J].
JACOBSON, PD ;
ROSENQUIST, CJ .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1988, 260 (11) :1586-1592
[9]   ADVERSE REACTIONS TO IONIC AND NONIONIC CONTRAST-MEDIA - A REPORT FROM THE JAPANESE-COMMITTEE-ON-THE-SAFETY-OF-CONTRAST MEDIA [J].
KATAYAMA, H ;
YAMAGUCHI, K ;
KOZUKA, T ;
TAKASHIMA, T ;
SEEZ, P ;
MATSUURA, K .
RADIOLOGY, 1990, 175 (03) :621-628
[10]   Unenhanced helical CT of ureteral stones: Incidence of associated urinary tract findings [J].
Katz, DS ;
Lane, MJ ;
Sommer, FG .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1996, 166 (06) :1319-1322