Sie sind auf Seite 1von 9

International Journal of Surgery 36 (2016) 638e646

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Surgery


journal homepage: www.journal-surgery.net

Review

Radiology of renal stone disease


Colin J. McCarthy a, Vinit Baliyan a, Hamed Kordbacheh a, Zafar Sajjad b,
Dushyant Sahani a, Avinash Kambadakone a, *
a
Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, White 270, Boston, MA 02114, USA
b
Department of Radiology, Aga Khan University Hospital, Stadium Road, Karachi 74800, Pakistan

h i g h l i g h t s

 Recent advances in Computed Tomography (CT) have improved the radiological evaluation of renal stones disease.
 With DECT, it is possible to determine the in vivo composition of renal stones, assisting with diagnosis and treatment.
 There are ongoing efforts to decrease radiation dose related to CT examinations, including those for renal stone disease.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Nephrolithiasis is a common cause of abdominal pain and will affect approximately 1 in 10 people in
Received 24 October 2016 their lifetime. In the past two decades, there have been several technological advances that have changed
Accepted 30 October 2016 the imaging approach to stone diagnosis and follow-up. We present a review of the current imaging
Available online 2 November 2016
evaluation for renal stone disease, and outline how new technology has helped with diagnosis and
management.
Keywords:
© 2016 IJS Publishing Group Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Nephrolithiasis
Radiology
Computed Tomography
Low dose
Ultrasound

1. Introduction decomposition, to characterize stone composition. The article will


also discuss the impact of these technological advances on medical
Kidney stones remain a very common problem, affecting and urological management of nephrolithiasis.
approximately 1 in 10 people at some point in their life [1]. The
incidence of kidney stones appears to have increased over the last
2. Imaging
few decades, and although this may be partly explained by
improved detection, at least some is due to changes in diet and
Unenhanced Computed Tomography (CT) of the abdomen and
rising levels of obesity [1].
pelvis has become the first-line test for evaluation of renal calculi in
Imaging plays an important role in the management of patients
patients with acute flank pain and suspicion of urolithiasis [2]. CT
with renal stone disease including initial diagnosis, treatment
has sensitivity and specificity of over 95% for the diagnosis of
planning and follow-up after medical therapy or urologic in-
nephrolithiasis [3]. Even in those patients who turn out not to have
terventions. In this paper, we discuss the various imaging tech-
nephrolithiasis, CT allow diagnosis of alternative causes for the
niques available for renal stone detection, together with the recent
patient's pain, such as appendicitis, diverticulitis or gynecological
advances that have improved our ability to not only detect stones,
emergencies (Fig. 1). In fact, an alternative diagnosis may be iden-
but also to use these novel techniques such as material
tified in up to 14% of patients undergoing CT for evaluation of
suspected urolithiasis [3].
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: colin.mccarthy@mgh.harvard.edu (C.J. McCarthy), vbaliyan@
mgh.harvard.edu (V. Baliyan), hkordbacheh@mgh.harvard.edu (H. Kordbacheh),
3. Ultrasound
zafar.sajjad@aku.edu (Z. Sajjad), DSAHANI@mgh.harvard.edu (D. Sahani),
AKAMBADAKONE@mgh.harvard.edu (A. Kambadakone). The use of ultrasound for the evaluation of renal pathology is

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.10.045
1743-9191/© 2016 IJS Publishing Group Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
C.J. McCarthy et al. / International Journal of Surgery 36 (2016) 638e646 639

Fig. 2. 79-year-old man with history of nephrolithiasis, undergoing follow-up ultra-


sound. Sagittal image of the left kidney reveals a large stone in the lower pole (arrow),
with posterior acoustic shadowing (arrowheads).

well established. In particular, and with regard to nephrolithiasis,


ultrasound is very effective in the detection of hydronephrosis,
which may be related to an obstructing renal or ureteric stone.
Indeed, ultrasound can reliably detect larger renal stones exhibiting
posterior acoustic shadowing (Fig. 2) with relative ease. However,
smaller stones, and in particularly those less than 5 mm in size, may
be difficult to detect on ultrasound [4e6]. Others have countered
that argument, and stated that although such small stones may be
missed on combination of ultrasound and plain radiograph of the
abdomen, such stones were not likely to become clinically impor-
tant, and may pass spontaneously [7].
In a recent randomized control trial, over 2700 patients with
suspected nephrolithiasis were randomized to undergo point of
care ultrasound (by an Emergency physician), diagnostic ultra-
sound in the radiology department, or CT scan. Although the use of
ultrasound is attractive given the relative easy of access, low cost
and absence of ionizing radiation, the authors found that in those
patients who had undergone point of care ultrasound and diag-
nostic ultrasound required additional workup in the form of CT scan
in 40.7% and 27% of cases, respectively. On the other hand, this
meant that more than half of the patients enrolled in an ultrasound
arm of the study did not require a subsequent CT scan [8].
Ultrasound at the point of care may also allow for the detection
of hydronephrosis. The STONE PLUS prediction tool, for example,
has recently addressed the significance of detecting hydro-
nephrosis [9]. By combining Sex, Timing, Origin, Nausea, Erythro-
cytes (STONE) with point-of-care limited ultrasonography (PLUS),
the authors noted that moderate or severe hydronephrosis
improved risk stratification of patients with nephrolithiasis, spe-
cifically identifying those who may be more likely to require
intervention. As a result, ultrasound remains an important tool in
the armamentarium of the urologist, not only for follow-up of pa-
tients with known nephrolithiasis, but also in those patients for
whom exposure to ionizing radiation is to be avoided, including
pregnant and pediatric patients.
Fig. 1. 66 year old female presenting with hypogastric pain with bilateral costo-
vertebral angle tenderness. Axial NCCT image (a) shows a calculus in left upper ureter.
Axial image (b) at the level of pelvis and coronal (c) show colonic diverticulosis with 4. Conventional radiography and intravenous pyelogram
diffuse bowel wall thickening, extensive pericolonic fat stranding and fluid in distal (IVP)
sigmoid colon, suggesting acute diverticulitis.

The advent of MDCT and its advantages in the evaluation of


640 C.J. McCarthy et al. / International Journal of Surgery 36 (2016) 638e646

patients with urolithiasis has superseded the role of IVP in diag- can be anticipated that stones 1 mm in size will pass almost nine
nosis of this condition [10]. Although it offers additional informa- times out of ten, dropping to a 25% spontaneous passage rate in
tion over plain radiography, such as identification of anatomic those patients with a stone that is 9 mm or greater. Similarly, stones
abnormalities and assessment of renal function non-contrast CT are more likely to pass if they are located closer to the vesicoure-
with or without CT urography provides superior evaluation in teric junction [16].
comparison to IVP [11,12]. There is an increased mean effective A commonly used measurement, the Hounsfield Unit (HU), has
radiation dose to patients [13] undergoing CT urography when been used since the beginning of CT technology [17] to determine
compared to IVP. Despite the limitations of plain radiography in the attenuation of material, and thereby estimating the composi-
assessment of stone disease, it continues to play a role in the day- tion of various materials. Although this is relatively straightforward
to-day evaluation of patients with nephrolithiasis particularly in for certain materials such air, water and cortical bone, where the
the follow up of patients undergoing urologic intervention to difference between materials is large, the use of such measure-
monitor changes in stone burden. ments for renal stones is fraught with difficulties, as discussed
above.
Despite its immense advantages, MDCT has challenges with
5. Multidetector CT
accurate determination of stone composition. Reliance on estima-
tion of mean attenuation values of the calculi by placement of re-
Non-contrast CT of the abdomen and pelvis is the typically the
gion of interest (ROI) has traditionally allowed physicians to
first radiological examination ordered in those patients who are
determine the composition of stone, which in the case of uric acid
suspected to have nephrolithiasis. Over the past two decades, there
stones permits medical management through urine alkalinization.
has been a tremendous rise in the availability of CT [14], which in
Uric acid stone have CT density values ranging from 200 to 450 HU
the case of suspected nephrolithiasis, can be performed without
at 120 kV, whereas calcium phosphate stones have mean HU values
any patient preparation including need for intravenous or oral
between 1200 and 1600. Although attenuation based methods have
contrast. Typically, non-contrast axial images (5 mm) are ob-
shown success using in-vitro models [18], they have limited success
tained from the top of the kidneys to the pelvis, and reviewed in
in in-vivo studies due to [19], mixed nature of many stones [20],
conjunction with sagittal and coronal reformats (2e3 mm). Unen-
and challenges with precise positioning of the ROI particularly for
hanced CT imaging not only allows detection of calcium based
small calculi [21].
stones but also permits detection of stones that are typically
radiolucent on plain radiography, such as xanthine and uric acid
stones [15]. 6. Dual energy CT (DECT)
In addition to detecting stones invisible on plain radiography
due to their size and/or composition, CT offers the additional Perhaps the biggest technological advance in renal stone im-
benefit of more precise anatomic localization of the urinary calculi aging in the last few years has been the widespread availability of
over conventional radiography. For example, stones in the ureter dual-energy CT (DECT). Although research on the potential benefits
that may be obscured by overlying bowel on plain radiographs are of dual-energy CT has been ongoing since the late 1970's [22], it is
readily demonstrated on CT. The secondary signs of ureteric stones, only in the last decade that the technology has become available to
such as hydronephrosis, hydroureter and perinephric stranding are the mainstream medical community. DECT can take the form of a
also immediately apparent on CT. Important complications, such as scanner whereby a single tube alternatives between high and low
forniceal rupture may also be detected, therefore allowing a far voltage (single source, ssDECT), or a scanner where there are two
more comprehensive assessment of not only the stone location, but tubes, typically mounted orthogonally, which operate at different
the associated effects and complications, which assists in triaging voltages (140 kVp and 80 kVp), and allow for acquisition of dual
those patients who may require more immediate management, energy images without the need for rapid switching of the tube
such as nephroureteral stent or nephrostomy placement. Similarly, current (dual source, dsDECT) [23].
patients who may be managed expectantly, or who may have Dual energy CT allows for enhanced determination of material
already passed the stone, can be identified. composition by comparing the attenuation of materials at different
The importance of reliably identifying simple parameters such x-ray energies. The technology is not limited to differentiating
as stone location and size cannot be underestimated, as doing so between stone types, but can also use mathematical algorithms to
has a direct impact on patient management (Fig. 3). For example, it identify iodine in the acquired images, and remove it to create a

Fig. 3. Axial (a) and coronal (b) non-contrast CT images from a patient presenting with left flank pain and gross hematuria. A large staghorn calculus (arrow) occupying the majority
of the left renal collecting system was identified,with focal cortical scarring in the lower pole (arrowhead). Volumetric analysis allows to more accurately estimate stone burden in
complex calculi than morphological measurements.
C.J. McCarthy et al. / International Journal of Surgery 36 (2016) 638e646 641

virtual unenhanced image [24]. In patients who require iodinated


contrast for evaluation of the solid abdominal organs, or delayed
urographic imaging, for example, the availability of a virtual
unenhanced data set negates the requirement to obtain a dedicated
non-contrast acquisition, thereby reducing radiation dose [25].
When imaged using DECT, renal stones exhibit different atten-
uation values at different x-ray energies, depending on their
composition. The values can then be applied to a look-up table to
estimate the stone composition [26], a technique that has been
validated with laboratory evaluation of stone composition [27]. The
dual energy index (DEI) is calculated using a mathematical formula
that incorporates the attenuation values from both portions of the
examination, and is used by software to generate a color-coded
map (Figs. 4 and 5). It is important to note that acquisition of two
sets of images at different x-ray energies does not represent a
doubling of the radiation dose; instead, the total dose is split,
roughly in half, between the two acquisitions [28]. If viewed
separately, such images would appear noisy due to a relative
decrease in the number of photons producing each image, however,
in reality, the information from both portions of the exam is com-
bined or blended using software to produce images that look
similar, if not identical, to those from conventional MDCT. It is
worth noting that a complete dual-energy CT of the abdomen can
be obtained in under 10 s [28], allowing for rapid diagnosis and
turnaround time. In cases where delayed or excretory phase im-
aging is required (CT urography), the ability to subtract the iodine
from the images, creating a virtual unenhanced image, at the same
time decreases the artifacts that can sometimes result from ureteric
peristalsis [29].
The ability to identify the composition of stones offers the po-
tential for treating physicians to customize therapy based on the
crystalline composition [1] (see treatment planning section below).

7. Radiation dose considerations & low dose CT

Although physicians should attempt to reduce or minimize ra-


diation exposure wherever possible, renal stone disease is one that
has benefitted greatly from recent advances in CT.
As many patients may suffer recurrent episodes of renal colic,
necessitating multiple follow-up radiology studies, it is important
to note that cumulative radiation exposure needs to be considered.
Wherever possible, follow-up with renal ultrasound and/or plain
radiograph of the abdomen may be sufficient, thereby avoiding the
increased radiation dose associated with CT scan. This is especially
true for calcium-based stones, which are radio-dense on plain
radiography.
However, in those cases where CT is needed for reliable re-
evaluation, follow-up examinations should be adjusted to use the
least amount of radiation possible whilst still obtaining adequate
imaging. The ALARA principle, or As Low As Reasonably Achievable,
is a tenet of modern imaging [30], and requires the medical com-
munity to make every reasonable effort to ensure radiation doses
are kept to a minimum. Adhering to the principle has benefits not
only for the patient, but also the wider community as a whole, and
is underpinned by regulatory limits and societal guidelines
Fig. 4. Characterization of kidney stones using dual-energy computed tomography
[31e33]. (DECT). Axial non-contrast CT image (a) shows a calculus at the upper-pole region of
It has been shown that careful estimation of the radiation left kidney. Post-processed color map (b) shows a calcium containing calculus in the
required to produce diagnostic quality images can reduce the ra- left kidney colored in blue. Dual energy plot (c) confirms the composition of the stone
diation dose by up to 65% in those undergoing surveillance of renal (arrow).
stones [34], from 22 mSv to 7.8 mSv (effective dose equivalent) on
MDCT using a phantom. Similarly, in studies addressing the in-vivo
dose reductions, it has been shown that reducing tube current can typically come equipped with other methods to assist with dose
produce reductions in dose of between 25% and 42%, whilst still reduction. For example, automatic tube current modulation allows
maintaining accuracy [35]. for the real-time adjustment of tube current depending on the
In addition to decreasing tube current, modern CT systems patient's body habitus; less x-rays are required for extremities and
642 C.J. McCarthy et al. / International Journal of Surgery 36 (2016) 638e646

algorithms including statistical-based and model-based IR re-


constructions may allow for radiation dose savings in the region of
25% [37], which can be supplemented with other dose-saving
techniques. A recent prospective, single-center study by Moore
et al. addressed the accuracy of reduced dose CT for evaluation of
suspected ureteric stones. The authors reported an impressive 88%
reduction in dose using a customized protocol, whilst still identi-
fying all patients who required urologic intervention [38]. These
findings have been replicated in other studies, including a paper by
Kulkarni et al., where the authors obtained dose reduction in excess
of 80% by using modified scan parameters and advanced iterative
reconstruction algorithms [39]. Others have reported that the
decreased resolution of soft tissue structures may decrease sensi-
tivity for detecting stones, however, especially in the pelvis, where
due to increased image noise, it may prove difficult to place a
calcification definitively within or outside the ureter, for example
[40].
A recent review of radiation dose from renal colic protocol CT
studies was performed in the United States, using information
obtained from the National Radiology Data Registry [41]. By way of
background, the Dose Index Registry (DIR) is sponsored by the
American College of Radiology (ACR), and gathers radiation expo-
sure data from individual CT studies performed at those institutions
that participate in the project [42]. Dose information (with patient
identifiers removed) is transmitted automatically from each CT
scanner to a local server, which in turn transmits the data to the
registry. This allows institutions to compare their average dose for a
particular examination to other facilities. The review found that the
dose index for renal stone protocol CT varied dramatically between
institutions (with a five-fold range of dose indexes), and that in
general, there was considerable scope to implement low dose
protocols to decrease radiation exposure.
Nonetheless, alternatives such as ultrasound may be useful in
carefully selected patients who require long-term follow-up, to
assess for gross interval changes in the stone burden, or the pres-
ence of hydronephrosis. In this group of patients, ultrasound has
been shown to be reasonably accurate at detecting stones [43].
However, when it comes to treatment planning, ultrasound has its
limitations.

8. Treatment planning

Accurate evaluation of the two-dimensional stone area or three-


dimensional stone volume on CT allows the treating physicians to
estimate the likelihood of success using extracorporeal shockwave
lithotripsy (ESWL) [44,45]. In addition, determination of stone
volume has been demonstrated to be more accurate determinant of
stone burden in morphologically complex stones such as staghorn
calculi.
With the advent of dual energy CT and material decomposition,
physicians are now able to reliably determine the composition of
Fig. 5. Characterization of kidney stones using dual-energy computed tomography
(DECT). Axial non-contrast CT image (a) shows a small calculus at the mid-pole region renal stones in vivo, thereby providing the treating urologist with
of the right kidney. Post-processed color map (b) showing a uric acid renal calculus in valuable information to assist with treatment planning. For
the right kidney colored in red. Dual energy plot (c) confirms the composition of the example, in cases of uric acid stones, which account for approxi-
stone (arrow). Note the mild dilatation of right pelvicalyceal system (a), due to another
mately 10% of all stones, urinary alkalization can be performed to
calculus in the right ureter (not shown).
aid with their dissolution [46]. Uric acid stone are composed mainly
of light chemical elements, such as hydrogen, carbon, oxygen and
lungs for example, but more are required for those areas that are nitrogen, in contradistinction to non-uric stones, which contain
difficult to penetrate, including the pelvis. These systems adjust heavy elements including calcium. On DECT, the attenuation of uric
radiation not just at different parts of the body (z position), but also acid stones varies considerably between the low and high x-ray
as the tube moves around different projections in the angular or x-y energy acquisitions, unlike other renal stones, where the values are
plane, within each 360-degree rotation of tube [36]. more similar [47]. Using an in vitro model, one group demonstrated
Advances in how CT information is reconstructed into images the accuracy in identifying uric acid stones from non-uric acid
have also played an important role in the drive to decrease radia- stones was in the range of 93e100% [46].
tion doses. For example, the use of newer iterative reconstruction Even in those stones that are determined to be non-uric acid
C.J. McCarthy et al. / International Journal of Surgery 36 (2016) 638e646 643

containing, work has been done on determining the fragility of


stones, and suitability for ESWL. In one study, an ex vivo model was
used to measure stone volume, roughness and internal
morphology. Specifically, the authors measured the ratio of CT
numbers on both the low and high-energy components of the ex-
amination, and developed a model that predicted stone fragility
based on time to comminution using a lithotripsy system [48]. The
reliability of dual energy for predicting the major component of
renal stones has also been validated using in vivo models [49].
Additionally, the ability to measure parameters such as the stone to
skin distance (SSD) on CT allows for patients to be accurately
identified for suitability for ESWL. Stones that are greater than
10 cm from the skin surface are less likely to respond to ESWL
[50,51].
The anatomic information obtained on CT, including stone
location, obstructions of the collecting system and complications
related to nephrolithiasis allow for detailed follow-up of patients to
assess for response to treatment. In those patients who have un-
dergone stent placement, dual energy can also assist in differenti-
ating the stent from a small residual stone fragment (Fig. 6). The
ability to accurately detect and localize stones allows patients to be
stratified into various treatment algorithms by the treating Urolo-
gist, using additional information including stone composition and
the presence or absence of hydronephrosis [52].
Although ultrasound continues to be used for treatment plan-
ning, it has been shown to overestimate the size of small stones,
with the potential for recommending treatment when in fact the
stone is smaller, and may have passed itself [6]. In particular, ul-
trasound may overestimate the size of small stones (5 mm) by
almost 85% [53], something that both radiologists and treating
urologists should be cognizant of.

9. Special situations

9.1. Pregnancy

Acute abdominal pain in pregnancy can be a challenging diag-


nostic dilemma. Once obstetric causes have been ruled out, physi-
cians must then set about the process of identifying the etiology of
the patient's pain. Nephrolithiasis is the commonest cause of non-
obstetric abdominal pain in pregnancy. As a general rule, CT or any
form of ionizing radiation are best avoided if at all possible [54],
leaving ultrasound or MRI as two of the potential methods for
evaluating the pregnant patient. Typically, ultrasound is used as a
first-line tool for the evaluation of nephrolithiasis in pregnant pa-
tients (Fig. 7), and its safety has been well established [55]. MRI, on
the other hand, is generally reserved as a second-line tool, with a
well-established safety profile [56], particularly in the second and
third trimesters. As a last resort, and in rare situations, low dose CT
scan has been performed in pregnant patients [57].
Formation of stones in pregnancy is multifactorial, and includes
altered glomerular filtration [58], increased excretion of uric acid
and oxalate, together with increased stasis of urine as a result of
compression the ureters from the gravid uterus, particularly in the
later stages of pregnancy. Due to physiologic hydronephrosis that
can be seen even in those patients without urolithasis, interpreta-
tion of the sonographic findings can prove problematic. When there
is persistent concern, MRI without gadolinium can provide addi-
tional diagnostic information. It should be noted that MRI is rela-
tively insensitive for the detection of the renal calculi themselves,
Fig. 6. 52 year old woman with history of recurrent nephrolithiasis. Following a recent
lithotripsy and stent placement, a follow-up CT was performed. Axial non-contrast CT
but does provide excellent soft tissue contrast that may allow for
(a) highlights the difficulty separating a residual calculus (arrow) from the ureteric the detection of secondary signs of nephrolithiasis, such as peri-
stent (arrowhead). Color-coded dual-energy CT (b) exhibits the benefits of material nephric or periureteric stranding, or hydronephrosis, for example
decomposition, allowing the stone to be clearly delineated from the adjacent stent. An [52,59]. In some cases, a renal or ureteric stone may not be found,
additional stone fragment (c, arrow) was also detected in the distal left ureter adjacent
but instead an alternative etiology may become apparent.
to the stent (arrowhead), best seen on dual-energy images.
644 C.J. McCarthy et al. / International Journal of Surgery 36 (2016) 638e646

9.2. Drug induced stones

It has been estimated that approximately 1 or 2% of all renal


calculi are drug-induced [60,61]. Patients on protease inhibitors
such as indinavir may also develop calculi, however such stones are
not visible on radiography or conventional non-contrast CT [62],
due to their low attenuation. As with any renal stone, patients may
require invasive procedures such as nephroureteral stent place-
ment or percutaneous nephrostomy, and so early diagnosis and an
understanding of the potential pitfalls is important. In these cases,
urinalysis may offer a clue, as indinavir crystals may be visible on
light microscopy [62,63]. Additionally, if drug-induced neph-
rolithiasis is strongly considered, CT urography may identify the
filling defect on delayed phase imaging.

10. Financial considerations

Renal stone disease is estimated to cost in the region of $2


billion per annum [64]. As a result, there are efforts to decrease the
costs associated with management of nephrolithiasis, including the
imaging studies that are performed [65]. In a multisite randomized
control trial, the comparative cost of point of care ultrasound
(performed by an Emergency Department physician), diagnostic
ultrasound performed in radiology, and abdominal CT was
analyzed. The Study of Tomography of Nephrolithiasis Evaluation
(STONE) trial examined over 2700 patients. The authors found that
cost of point of care ultrasound was $113, compared with $141 for a
formal diagnostic ultrasound in the radiology department and $248
for a CT scan of the abdomen. However, the authors found that the
total costs within 7 days were similar in all groups, due to a com-
bination of factors, including the fact that the initial diagnostic
study formed only a small fraction of the total cost of care, partic-
ularly in those patients who required hospitalization [66]. It is clear
that healthcare costs associated with diagnosis and treatment of
renal stone disease is complex, and identifying and achieving cost
savings is challenging.

11. Conclusion

Radiological techniques play an integral role in the management


of patients with urolithiasis. Advances in technology particularly in
the realm of MDCT have enabled these techniques to not only
provide accurate detection but also provide urologists with infor-
mation crucial for patient selection, treatment planning and
monitoring response to various urologic interventions. Continued
attention to radiation dose considerations related to CT technology
remains of paramount importance. Radiologists and urologists
should work in tandem to optimally utilize imaging techniques
exploring alternative imaging methods or low dose techniques to
ensure an optimal balance between risks and benefits associated
with imaging to provide best possible care for patients with stone
disease.

Ethical approval

None.

Fig. 7. 33 year old female with early pregnancy presented with recent onset left flank
pain. Ultrasound image (a) shows pelvicalyceal system dilatation in the left kidney.
Ultrasound images in transverse (b) and longitudinal (c) planes at the level of bladder
show a small calculus at vesicoureteric junction and dilated lower ureter. A gravid
uterus with gestational sac and a well defined fetal pole can also be noted (c & d).
C.J. McCarthy et al. / International Journal of Surgery 36 (2016) 638e646 645

Sources of funding Radiology 131 (2) (1979) 521e523.


[23] T.G. Flohr, et al., First performance evaluation of a dual-source CT (DSCT)
system, Eur. Radiol. 16 (2) (2006) 256e268.
None. [24] M. Patino, et al., Material separation using dual-energy CT: current and
emerging applications, Radiographics 36 (4) (2016) 1087e1105.
[25] C.Y. Chen, et al., Split-bolus portal venous phase dual-energy CT urography:
Author contribution protocol design, image quality, and dose reduction, AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 205
(5) (2015) W492eW501.
Colin J. McCarthy. [26] C.A. Coursey, et al., Dual-energy multidetector CT: how does it work, what can
it tell us, and when can we use it in abdominopelvic imaging? Radiographics
Vinit Baliyan.
30 (4) (2010) 1037e1055.
Hamed Kordbacheh. [27] G. Hidas, et al., Determination of renal stone composition with dual-energy
Zafar Sajjad. CT: in vivo analysis and comparison with x-ray diffraction, Radiology 257
(2) (2010) 394e401.
Dushyant Sahani.
[28] A. Graser, et al., Dual energy CT characterization of urinary calculi: initial
Avinash Kambadakone. in vitro and clinical experience, Invest. Radiol. 43 (2) (2008) 112e119.
All the authors have equal contribution in literature search, [29] H. Scheffel, et al., Dual-energy contrast-enhanced computed tomography for
manuscript writing and proof reading. the detection of urinary stone disease, Invest. Radiol. 42 (12) (2007) 823e829.
[30] Icrp, The optimisation of radiological protection: broadening the process. ICRP
publication 101. Approved by the Commission in September 2005, Ann. ICRP
Conflicts of interest 36 (3) (2006), p. 65, 71-104.
[31] M.S. Stecker, et al., Guidelines for patient radiation dose management, J. Vasc.
Interv. Radiol. 20 (Suppl. 7) (2009) S263eS273.
None. [32] C.H. McCollough, et al., Radiation exposure and pregnancy: when should we
be concerned? Radiographics 27 (4) (2007) 909e917 discussion 917-8.
[33] J.A. Brink, E.S. Amis Jr., Image Wisely: a campaign to increase awareness about
Guarantor
adult radiation protection, Radiology 257 (3) (2010) 601e602.
[34] A.L. Spielmann, et al., Decreasing the radiation dose for renal stone CT: a
Avinash Kambadakone. feasibility study of single- and multidetector CT, AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 178
(5) (2002) 1058e1062.
[35] J.P. Heneghan, et al., Helical CT for nephrolithiasis and ureterolithiasis: com-
References parison of conventional and reduced radiation-dose techniques, Radiology
229 (2) (2003) 575e580.
[1] C.D. Scales Jr., et al., Prevalence of kidney stones in the United States, Eur. Urol. [36] M.K. Kalra, et al., Techniques and applications of automatic tube current
62 (1) (2012) 160e165. modulation for CT, Radiology 233 (3) (2004) 649e657.
[2] C.A. Coursey, et al., ACR Appropriateness Criteria(R) acute onset flank [37] P. Prakash, et al., Reducing abdominal CT radiation dose with adaptive sta-
painesuspicion of stone disease, Ultrasound Q. 28 (3) (2012) 227e233. tistical iterative reconstruction technique, Invest. Radiol. 45 (4) (2010)
[3] Y. Andrabi, et al., Advances in CT imaging for urolithiasis, Indian J. Urol. 31 (3) 202e210.
(2015) 185e193. [38] C.L. Moore, et al., Ureteral stones: implementation of a reduced-dose CT
[4] W. King 3rd, C. Kimme-Smith, J. Winter, Renal stone shadowing: an investi- protocol in patients in the emergency department with moderate to high
gation of contributing factors, Radiology 154 (1) (1985) 191e196. likelihood of calculi on the basis of STONE score, Radiology 280 (3) (2016)
[5] S. Ulusan, Z. Koc, N. Tokmak, Accuracy of sonography for detecting renal 743e751.
stone: comparison with CT, J. Clin. Ultrasound 35 (5) (2007) 256e261. [39] N.M. Kulkarni, et al., Radiation dose reduction at multidetector CT with
[6] V. Ganesan, et al., Accuracy of ultrasonography for renal stone detection and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction for evaluation of urolithiasis: how
size determination: is it good enough for management decisions? BJU Int. low can we go? Radiology 265 (1) (2012) 158e166.
(2016 Jul 26) http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bju.13605. [40] I.M. Malkawi, et al., Low-dose (10%) computed tomography may Be inferior to
[7] T. Ripolles, et al., Suspected ureteral colic: plain film and sonography vs standard-dose CT in the evaluation of acute renal colic in the emergency room
unenhanced helical CT. A prospective study in 66 patients, Eur. Radiol. 14 (1) setting, J. Endourol. 30 (5) (2016) 493e496.
(2004) 129e136. [41] A. Lukasiewicz, et al., Radiation dose index of renal colic protocol CT studies in
[8] R. Smith-Bindman, et al., Ultrasonography versus computed tomography for the United States: a report from the American College of radiology National
suspected nephrolithiasis, N. Engl. J. Med. 371 (12) (2014) 1100e1110. radiology data Registry, Radiology 271 (2) (2014) 445e451.
[9] B. Daniels, et al., STONE PLUS: evaluation of emergency department patients [42] R.L. Morin, L.P. Coombs, M.B. Chatfield, ACR dose index Registry, J. Am. Coll.
with suspected renal colic, using a clinical prediction tool combined with Radiol. 8 (4) (2011) 288e291.
point-of-care limited ultrasonography, Ann. Emerg. Med. 67 (4) (2016) [43] T. Kanno, et al., The efficacy of ultrasonography for the detection of renal
439e448. stone, Urology 84 (2) (2014) 285e288.
[10] S. Shine, Urinary calculus: IVU vs. CT renal stone? A critically appraised topic, [44] J.D. Wiesenthal, et al., A clinical nomogram to predict the successful shock
Abdom. Imaging 33 (1) (2008) 41e43. wave lithotripsy of renal and ureteral calculi, J. Urol. 186 (2) (2011) 556e562.
[11] A.S. Cass, J. Vieira, Comparison of IVP and CT findings in patients with sus- [45] M. Abdel-Khalek, et al., Prediction of success rate after extracorporeal shock-
pected severe renal injury, Urology 29 (5) (1987) 484e487. wave lithotripsy of renal stonesea multivariate analysis model, Scand. J. Urol.
[12] M. Dhar, J.D. Denstedt, Imaging in diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of Nephrol. 38 (2) (2004) 161e167.
stone patients, Adv. Chronic Kidney Dis. 16 (1) (2009) 39e47. [46] A.N. Primak, et al., Noninvasive differentiation of uric acid versus non-uric
[13] R.D. Nawfel, et al., Patient radiation dose at CT urography and conventional acid kidney stones using dual-energy CT, Acad. Radiol. 14 (12) (2007)
urography, Radiology 232 (1) (2004) 126e132. 1441e1447.
[14] D.J. Brenner, E.J. Hall, Computed tomographyean increasing source of radia- [47] N.M. Kulkarni, et al., Determination of renal stone composition in phantom
tion exposure, N. Engl. J. Med. 357 (22) (2007) 2277e2284. and patients using single-source dual-energy computed tomography,
[15] G. Chu, et al., Sensitivity and value of digital CT scout radiography for J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr. 37 (1) (2013) 37e45.
detecting ureteral stones in patients with ureterolithiasis diagnosed on [48] A. Ferrero, et al., Quantitative prediction of stone fragility from routine dual
unenhanced CT, AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 173 (2) (1999) 417e423. energy CT: ex vivo proof of feasibility, Acad. Radiol. (2016 Oct 4), http://
[16] D.M. Coll, M.J. Varanelli, R.C. Smith, Relationship of spontaneous passage of dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2016.07.016 pii: S1076-6332(16)30184-2.
ureteral calculi to stone size and location as revealed by unenhanced helical [49] G.M. Zhang, et al., Prospective prediction of the major component of urinary
CT, AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 178 (1) (2002) 101e103. stone composition with dual-source dual-energy CT in vivo, Clin. Radiol. 71
[17] G.N. Hounsfield, Computerized transverse axial scanning (tomography): Part I. (11) (2016) 1178e1183.
Description of system, Br. J. Radiol. 46 (552) (1973 Dec) 1016e1022. [50] A.E. Perks, et al., Stone attenuation and skin-to-stone distance on computed
[18] S. Deveci, et al., Spiral computed tomography: role in determination of tomography predicts for stone fragmentation by shock wave lithotripsy,
chemical compositions of pure and mixed urinary stonesean in vitro study, Urology 72 (4) (2008) 765e769.
Urology 64 (2) (2004) 237e240. [51] G. Mullhaupt, et al., How do stone attenuation and skin-to-stone distance in
[19] S.Y. Nakada, et al., Determination of stone composition by noncontrast spiral computed tomography influence the performance of shock wave lithotripsy
computed tomography in the clinical setting, Urology 55 (6) (2000) 816e819. in ureteral stone disease? BMC Urol. 15 (2015) 72.
[20] S.F. da Silva, et al., Determination of urinary stone composition based on stone [52] B.H. Eisner, et al., Nephrolithiasis: what surgeons need to know, AJR Am. J.
morphology: a prospective study of 325 consecutive patients in an emerging Roentgenol. 196 (6) (2011) 1274e1278.
country, Clin. Chem. Lab. Med. 47 (5) (2009) 561e564. [53] K.M. Sternberg, et al., Ultrasonography significantly overestimates stone size
[21] E. Ketelslegers, B.E. Van Beers, Urinary calculi: improved detection and when compared to low-dose, noncontrast computed tomography, Urology 95
characterization with thin-slice multidetector CT, Eur. Radiol. 16 (1) (2006) (2016) 67e71.
161e165. [54] G. Masselli, et al., Acute abdominal and pelvic pain in pregnancy: ESUR rec-
[22] G.D. Chiro, et al., Tissue signatures with dual-energy computed tomography, ommendations, Eur. Radiol. 23 (12) (2013) 3485e3500.
646 C.J. McCarthy et al. / International Journal of Surgery 36 (2016) 638e646

[55] D.L. Miller, Safety assurance in obstetrical ultrasound, Semin. Ultrasound CT Kidney J. 7 (2) (2014) 121e126.
MR 29 (2) (2008) 156e164. [61] D. Lehr, Clinical toxicity of sulfonamides, Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 69 (3) (1957)
[56] E. Kanal, et al., ACR blue ribbon panel response to the AJR commentary by 417e447.
shellock and Crues on the ACR white paper on MR safety, AJR Am. J. Roent- [62] B.F. Schwartz, et al., Imaging characteristics of indinavir calculi, J. Urol. 161 (4)
genol. 180 (1) (2003) 31e35. (1999) 1085e1087.
[57] W.M. White, et al., Predictive value of current imaging modalities for the [63] J.B. Kopp, et al., Crystalluria and urinary tract abnormalities associated with
detection of urolithiasis during pregnancy: a multicenter, longitudinal study, indinavir, Ann. Intern Med. 127 (2) (1997) 119e125.
J. Urol. 189 (3) (2013) 931e934. [64] Y. Lotan, Economics and cost of care of stone disease, Adv. Chronic Kidney Dis.
[58] H.A. Gabert, J.M. Miller Jr., Renal disease in pregnancy, Obstet. Gynecol. Surv. 16 (1) (2009) 5e10.
40 (7) (1985) 449e461. [65] C.K. Cassel, J.A. Guest, Choosing wisely: helping physicians and patients make
[59] B. Kalb, et al., Acute abdominal pain: is there a potential role for MRI in the smart decisions about their care, JAMA 307 (17) (2012) 1801e1802.
setting of the emergency department in a patient with renal calculi? J. Magn. [66] J. Melnikow, et al., Cost analysis of the STONE randomized trial: can health
Reson Imaging 32 (5) (2010) 1012e1023. care costs be reduced one test at a time? Med. Care 54 (4) (2016) 337e342.
[60] H. Izzedine, F.X. Lescure, F. Bonnet, HIV medication-based urolithiasis, Clin.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen