• European radiology · Jan 2004

    Comparative Study

    Suspected ureteral colic: plain film and sonography vs unenhanced helical CT. A prospective study in 66 patients.

    • Tomás Ripollés, Marcos Agramunt, José Errando, María Jesús Martínez, Belén Coronel, and María Morales.
    • Department of Radiology, Hospital Universitario Dr. Peset, 90 Gaspar Aguilar Avenue, 46017, Valencia, Spain. ripolles_tom@gva.es
    • Eur Radiol. 2004 Jan 1;14(1):129-36.

    AbstractThe aim of this study was to compare the sensitivity and specificity of plain abdominal films plus ultrasound, vs nonenhanced CT for the diagnosis of ureteral colic in patients with acute flank pain. During a 4-month period, 66 patients (mean age 48 years) with acute flank pain were prospectively studied by means of plain abdominal film, US, and unenhanced CT. The presence of lithiasis and of obstructive uropathy signs were determined. The plain film was only used as a guide for the US exam. Clinical follow-up of all patients was obtained. Ureteral lithiasis was confirmed in 56 patients. The CT had a greater sensitivity (93 vs 79%) and negative predictive value (71 vs 46%) for the detection of lithiasis. The combination of lithiasis plus obstructive signs showed a sensitivity and a specificity of 100% for CT and of 100 and 90%, respectively, for US. The 11 lithiasis not detected by US were passed spontaneously (10 were <5 mm). Both techniques showed similar extraurinary pathology. Computed tomography is the most accurate technique for the detection of ureteral lithiasis; however, the combination of plain film and US is an alternative to nonenhanced CT with a lower sensitivity and radiation dose that has a good practical value.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…