American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 173, 417-423, Copyright © 1999 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Sensitivity and value of digital CT scout radiography for detecting ureteral stones in patients with ureterolithiasis diagnosed on unenhanced CT

G Chu, AT Rosenfield, K Anderson, L Scout and RC Smith
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06510, USA.

OBJECTIVE: When unenhanced CT reveals ureterolithiasis, some patients will require baseline or follow-up conventional radiography to help guide clinical management. We sought to determine the sensitivity of routinely obtained scout radiographs for revealing stones to determine if the scout view can be used in place of baseline conventional radiography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the CT scout radiographs in conjunction with axial CT images in a series of 215 consecutive patients in whom CT revealed a single ureteral stone. On the scout radiographs, stones were classified as definitely visible, definitely not visible, or indeterminate. In addition, a phantom was constructed using fragments of kidney stones to evaluate the effect of the digital scout kilovoltage settings on stone visualization. RESULTS: Forty-nine percent of stones were definitely visible on scout radiography, 47% were definitely not visible, and 4% were indeterminate. Four stones larger than 10 mm that were not visible on scout radiography were composed of uric acid (n = 2) or xanthine (n = 2). Scout radiographs of the phantom determined an optimal kilovoltage setting of 80-100 kVp to visualize stones less than 3 mm, whereas stones greater than or equal to 3 mm were visible at all kilovoltage settings. CONCLUSION: In our series, 49% of ureteral stones were visible on the often-overlooked routine CT scout radiograph. Imaging of phantoms showed that stone visualization can be optimized by using the lowest kilovoltage settings. Therefore, the CT scout view can be used as a baseline study in patients requiring follow-up radiography and for planning treatment of patients requiring lithotripsy or other intervention. Finally, large stones not visible on scout radiographs are likely composed of uric acid or xanthine.
CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S J Freeman and H Sells Investigation of loin pain Imaging, August 1, 2005; 17(1): 19 - 33. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. E. Tublin, M. E. Murphy, D. M. Delong, F. N. Tessler, and M. A. Kliewer Conspicuity of Renal Calculi at Unenhanced CT: Effects of Calculus Composition and Size and CT Technique Radiology, October 1, 2002; 225(1): 91 - 96. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. E. Van Beers, S. Dechambre, P. Hulcelle, R. Materne, and J. Jamart Value of Multislice Helical CT Scans and Maximum-Intensity-Projection Images to Improve Detection of Ureteral Stones at Abdominal Radiography Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2001; 177(5): 1117 - 1121. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Y. Kim, K. S. Cho, K.-S. Song, J. H. Kim, J.-G. Kim, and H. K. Ha Urinary Calculi on Computed Radiography: Comparison of Observer Performance with Hard-Copy Versus Soft-Copy Images on Different Viewer Systems Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2001; 177(2): 331 - 335. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. J. Zagoria, E. G. Khatod, and M. Y. M. Chen Abdominal Radiography After CT Reveals Urinary Calculi: A Method to Predict Usefulness of Abdominal Radiography on the Basis of Size and CT Attenuation of Calculi Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2001; 176(5): 1117 - 1122. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Z. Assi, J. F. Platt, I. R. Francis, R. H. Cohan, and M. Korobkin Sensitivity of CT Scout Radiography and Abdominal Radiography for Revealing Ureteral Calculi on Helical CT: Implications for Radiologic Follow-Up Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2000; 175(2): 333 - 337. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. C. Smith and M. Varanelli Diagnosis and Management of Acute Ureterolithiasis: CT Is Truth Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2000; 175(1): 3 - 6. [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. H. McCollough, M. R. Bruesewitz, T. J. Vrtiska, B. F. King, A. J. LeRoy, J. P. Quam, and R. R. Hattery Image Quality and Dose Comparison among Screen-Film, Computed, and CT Scanned Projection Radiography: Applications to CT Urography Radiology, November 1, 2001; 221(2): 395 - 403. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]