AJR Women's Imaging Online
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Poletti, P.-A.
Right arrow Articles by Becker, C. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Poletti, P.-A.
Right arrow Articles by Becker, C. D.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
DOI:10.2214/AJR.06.0793
AJR 2007; 188:927-933
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Original Research

Low-Dose Versus Standard-Dose CT Protocol in Patients with Clinically Suspected Renal Colic

Pierre-Alexandre Poletti1, Alexandra Platon1, Olivier T. Rutschmann2, Franz R. Schmidlin3, Christophe E. Iselin3 and Christoph D. Becker1

1 Department of Radiology, University Hospital Geneva, 24 rue Micheli-du-Crest-14, Geneva 1211, Switzerland.
2 Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
3 Urology Clinic, University Hospital Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to compare a low-dose abdominal CT protocol, delivering a dose of radiation close to the dose delivered by abdominal radiography, with standard-dose unenhanced CT in patients with suspected renal colic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. One hundred twenty-five patients (87 men, 38 women; mean age, 45 years) who were admitted with suspected renal colic underwent both abdominal low-dose CT (30 mAs) and standard-dose CT (180 mAs). Low-dose CT and standard-dose CT were independently reviewed, in a delayed fashion, by two radiologists for the characterization of renal and ureteral calculi (location, size) and for indirect signs of renal colic (renal enlargement, pyeloureteral dilatation, periureteral or renal stranding). Results reported for low-dose CT, with regard to the patients' body mass indexes (BMIs), were compared with those obtained with standard-dose CT (reference standard). The presence of non-urinary tract-related disorders was also assessed. Informed consent was obtained from all patients.

RESULTS. In patients with a BMI < 30, low-dose CT achieved 96% sensitivity and 100% specificity for the detection of indirect signs of renal colic and a sensitivity of 95% and a specificity of 97% for detecting ureteral calculi. In patients with a BMI < 30, low-dose CT was 86% sensitive for detecting ureteral calculi < 3 mm and 100% sensitive for detecting calculi > 3 mm. Low-dose CT was 100% sensitive and specific for depicting non-urinary tract-related disorders (n =6).

CONCLUSION. Low-dose CT achieves sensitivities and specificities close to those of standard-dose CT in assessing the diagnosis of renal colic, depicting ureteral calculi > 3 mm in patients with a BMI < 30, and correctly identifying alternative diagnoses.

Keywords: abdominal imaging • CT • low-dose CT • radiation dose • urinary tract


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Ultrasound MedHome page
S. J. Park, B. H. Yi, H. K. Lee, Y. H. Kim, G. J. Kim, and H. C. Kim
Evaluation of Patients With Suspected Ureteral Calculi Using Sonography as an Initial Diagnostic Tool: How Can We Improve Diagnostic Accuracy?
J. Ultrasound Med., October 1, 2008; 27(10): 1441 - 1450.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
T. Niemann, T. Kollmann, and G. Bongartz
Diagnostic Performance of Low-Dose CT for the Detection of Urolithiasis: A Meta-Analysis
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2008; 191(2): 396 - 401.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
G. M. Israel, S. Herlihy, A. N. Rubinowitz, D. Cornfeld, and J. Brink
Does a Combination of Dose Modulation with Fast Gantry Rotation Time Limit CT Image Quality?
Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2008; 191(1): 140 - 144.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
B. Siewert, J. Sosna, A. McNamara, V. Raptopoulos, and J. B. Kruskal
Quality Initiatives: Missed Lesions at Abdominal Oncologic CT: Lessons Learned from Quality Assurance
RadioGraphics, May 1, 2008; 28(3): 623 - 638.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
C. T. Hsu, Z. J. Wang, A. S. L. Yu, R. G. Gould, Y. Fu, B. N. Joe, A. Qayyum, R. S. Breiman, F. V. Coakley, and B. M. Yeh
Physiology of Renal Medullary Tip Hyperattenuation at Unenhanced CT: Urinary Specific Gravity and the NaCl Concentration Gradient
Radiology, April 1, 2008; 247(1): 147 - 153.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
E. K. Paulson, C. Weaver, L. M. Ho, L. Martin, J. Li, J. Darsie, and D. P. Frush
Conventional and Reduced Radiation Dose of 16-MDCT for Detection of Nephrolithiasis and Ureterolithiasis
Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2008; 190(1): 151 - 157.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2007 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.