Comparison between ultrasound and noncontrast helical computed tomography for identification of acute ureterolithiasis in a teaching hospital setting

Authors

  • Luís Ronan Marquez Ferreira de Souza Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina
  • Suzan Menasce Goldman Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina
  • Salomão Faintuch Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina
  • Juliano Ferreira Faria Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina
  • Daniel Bekhor Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina
  • Dario Ariel Tiferes Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina
  • Valdemar Ortiz Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina
  • Peter Choyke Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina
  • Jacob Szejnfeld Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina

Keywords:

Spiral computed tomography, Ultrasonography, Ureteral calculi, Lithiasis, Flank pain

Abstract

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Recent studies have shown noncontrast computed tomography (NCT) to be more effective than ultrasound (US) for imaging acute ureterolithiasis. However, to our knowledge, there are few studies directly comparing these techniques in an emergency teaching hospital setting. The objectives of this study were to compare the diagnostic accuracy of US and NCT performed by senior radiology residents for diagnosing acute ureterolithiasis; and to assess interobserver agreement on tomography interpretations by residents and experienced abdominal radiologists. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective study of 52 consecutive patients, who underwent both US and NCT within an interval of eight hours, at Hospital São Paulo. METHODS: US scans were performed by senior residents and read by experienced radiologists. NCT scan images were read by senior residents, and subsequently by three abdominal radiologists. The interobserver variability was assessed using the kappa statistic. RESULTS: Ureteral calculi were found in 40 out of 52 patients (77%). US presented sensitivity of 22% and specifi city of 100%. When collecting system dilatation was associated, US demonstrated 73% sensitivity, 82% specifi city. The interobserver agreement in NCT analysis was very high with regard to identifi cation of calculi, collecting system dilatation and stranding of perinephric fat. CONCLUSIONS: US has limited value for identifying ureteral calculi in comparison with NCT, even when collecting system dilatation is present. Residents and abdominal radiologists demonstrated excellent agreement rates for ureteral calculi, identifi cation of collecting system dilatation and stranding of perinephric fat on NCT.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Luís Ronan Marquez Ferreira de Souza, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina

MD, PhD. Diagnostic Imaging Department, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina (Unifesp-EPM), São Paulo, Brazil.

Suzan Menasce Goldman, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina

MD, PhD. Diagnostic Imaging Department, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina (Unifesp-EPM), São Paulo, Brazil.

Salomão Faintuch, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina

MD. Diagnostic Imaging Department, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina (Unifesp-EPM), São Paulo, Brazil.

Juliano Ferreira Faria, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina

MD. Diagnostic Imaging Department, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina (Unifesp-EPM), São Paulo, Brazil.

Daniel Bekhor, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina

MD, PhD. Diagnostic Imaging Department, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina (Unifesp-EPM), São Paulo, Brazil.

Dario Ariel Tiferes, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina

MD, PhD. Diagnostic Imaging Department, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina (Unifesp-EPM), São Paulo, Brazil.

Valdemar Ortiz, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina

MD, PhD. Department of Urology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina (Unifesp-EPM), São Paulo, Brazil.

Peter Choyke, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina

MD, PhD. Diagnostic Radiology Department, The Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, United States.

Jacob Szejnfeld, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina

MD, PhD. Diagnostic Imaging Department, Universidade Federal de São Paulo — Escola Paulista de Medicina (Unifesp-EPM), São Paulo, Brazil.

References

Smith RC, Rosenfield AT, Choe KA, et al. Acute flank pain: comparison of non-contrast-enhanced CT and intravenous urography. Radiology. 1995;194(3):789-94.

Tamm EP, Silverman PM, Shuman WP. Evaluation of the pa- tient with flank pain and possible ureteral calculus. Radiology. 2003;228(2):319-29.

Sourtzis S, Thibeau JF, Damry N, Raslan A, Vandendris M, Bel- lemans M. Radiologic investigation of renal colic: unenhanced helical CT compared with excretory urography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172(6):1491-4.

Goldman SM, Faintuch S, Ajzen SA, et al. Diagnostic value of attenuation measurements of the kidney on unenhanced heli- cal CT of obstructive ureterolithiasis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;182(5):1251-4.

Lanoue MZ, Mindell HJ. The use of unenhanced helical CT to evaluate suspected renal colic. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169(6):1579-84.

Souza LRMF, Faintuch S, De Nicola H, et al. A tomografia computadorizada helicoidal no diagnóstico da litíase ureteral. Rev Imagem. 2004;26(4):315-21. Available from: http://www. spr.org.br/default.aspx?pagid=ERNCOPUI&menuid=268#. Accessed in 2007 (Feb 13).

Dyer RB, Zagoria RJ. Radiological evaluation of ureteral calculi and acute ureteral obstruction. In: Pollack HM, editor. Clinical urography. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1990. p. 2200-38.

Smith RC, Varanelli M. Diagnosis and management of acute ureterolithiasis: CT is truth. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;175(1):3-6.

Patlas M, Farkas A, Fisher D, Zaghal I, Hadas-Halpern I. Ul- trasound vs CT for the detection of ureteric stones in patients with renal colic. Br J Radiol. 2001;74(886):901-4.

Middleton WD, Dodds WJ, Lawson TL, Foley WD. Re- nal calculi: sensitivity for detection with US. Radiology. 1988;167(1):239-44.

Sheafor DH, Hertzberg BS, Freed KS, et al. Nonenhanced helical CT and US in the emergency evaluation of patients with renal colic: prospective comparison. Radiology. 2000;217(3):792-7.

Freed KS, Paulson EK, Frederick MG, et al. Interobserver vari- ability in the interpretation of unenhanced helical CT for the diagnosis of ureteral stone disease. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1998;22(5):732-7.

Catalano O, Nunziata A, Altei F, Siani A. Suspected ureteral colic: primary helical CT versus selective helical CT after unenhanced radiography and sonography. AJR Am J Roent- genol. 2002;178(2):379-87.

Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):159-74.

Fowler KA, Locken JA, Duchesne JH, Williamson MR. US for detecting renal calculi with nonenhanced CT as a reference standard. Radiology. 2002;222(1):109-13.

Drach GW. Urinary lithiasis. Etiology, diagnosis and medical management. In: Walsh PC, Retik AB, Stamey TA, Vaughan ED Jr, editors. Campbell’s urology. 6th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1992. p. 2085-156.

Platt JF. Urinary obstruction. Radiol Clin North Am. 1996;34(6):1113-29.

Sudah M, Vanninen RL, Partanen K, et al. Patients with acute flank pain: comparison of MR urography with unenhanced helical CT. Radiology. 2002;223(1):98-105.

Preminger GM, Vieweg J, Leder RA, Nelson RC. Urolithiasis: detection and management with unenhanced spiral CT--a urologic perspective. Radiology. 1998;207(2):308-9.

Memarsadeghi M, Heinz-Peer G, Helbich TH, et al. Unen- hanced multi-detector row CT in patients suspected of having urinary stone disease: effect of section width on diagnosis. Radiology. 2005;235(2):530-6.

Katz D, Hines J, Rausch DR, et al. Unenhanced heli- cal CT for suspected renal colic. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173(2):425-30.

Coll DM, Varanelli MJ, Smith RC. Relationship of spontane- ous passage of ureteral calculi to stone size and location as revealed by unenhanced helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;178(1):101-3.

Bell TV, Fenlon HM, Davison BD, Ahari HK, Hus- sain S. Unenhanced helical CT criteria to differentiate distal ureteral calculi from pelvic phleboliths. Radiology. 1998;207(2):363-7.

Chen MY, Zagoria RJ, Saunders HS, Dyer RB. Trends in the use of unenhanced helical CT for acute urinary colic. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173(6):1447-50.

Smith RC, Verga M, McCarthy S, Rosenfield AT. Diagnosis of acute flank pain: value of unenhanced helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996;166(1):97-101.

Grisi G, Stacul F, Cuttin R, Rimondini A, Meduri S, Dalla Palma

L. Cost analysis of different protocols for imaging a patient with acute flank pain. Eur Radiol. 2000;10(10):1620-7.

Levine JA, Neitlich J, Verga M, Dalrymple N, Smith RC. Ureteral calculi in patients with flank pain: correlation of plain radiography with unenhanced helical CT. Radiology. 1997;204(1):27-31.

Haddad MC, Sharif HS, Shahed MS, et al. Renal colic: diagnosis and outcome. Radiology. 1992;184(1):83-8.

Smith RC, Verga M, Dalrymple N, McCarthy S, Rosen- field AT. Acute ureteral obstruction: value of secondary signs on helical unenhanced CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996;167(5):1109-13.

Dalrymple NC, Casford B, Raiken DP, Elsass KD, Pagan RA. Pearls and pitfalls in the diagnosis of ureterolithiasis with un- enhanced helical CT. Radiographics. 2000;20(2):439-47; quiz 527-8, 532.

Ege G, Akman H, Kuzucu K, Yildiz S. Acute uretero- lithiasis: incidence of secondary signs on unenhanced helical CT and influence on patient management. Clin Radiol. 2003;58(12):990-4.

Varanelli MJ, Coll DM, Levine JA, Rosenfield AT, Smith RC. Relationship between duration of pain and secondary signs of obstruction of the urinary tract on unenhanced helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;177(2):325-30.

Svedstrom E, Alanen A, Nurmi M. Radiologic diagnosis of renal colic: the role of plain films, excretory urography and sonography. Eur J Radiol. 1990;11(3):180-3.

Reis-Santos JM, Reis-Santos KT. Urinary obstruction due to lithiasis. Br J Urol. 2000;26(4):360-71. Available from http:// www.brazjurol.com.br/pdf/reis_santos_360_371.pdf. Accessed in 2007 (Feb 13).

Galvão Filho MM, D’Íppolito G, Hartmann LG, et al. O valor da tomografia computadorizada helicoidal sem contraste na ava- liação de pacientes com dor no flanco. [The value of unenhanced helical computed tomography in the evaluation of patients with pain in the flank]. Radiol Bras. 2001;34(3):129-34.

Sandhu C, Anson KM, Patel U. Urinary tract stones--Part I: role of radiological imaging in diagnosis and treatment planning. Clin Radiol. 2003;58(6):415-21.

Downloads

Published

2007-03-03

How to Cite

1.
Souza LRMF de, Goldman SM, Faintuch S, Faria JF, Bekhor D, Tiferes DA, Ortiz V, Choyke P, Szejnfeld J. Comparison between ultrasound and noncontrast helical computed tomography for identification of acute ureterolithiasis in a teaching hospital setting. Sao Paulo Med J [Internet]. 2007 Mar. 3 [cited 2025 Mar. 9];125(2):102-7. Available from: https://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/2082

Issue

Section

Original Article