Value of Multislice Helical CT Scans and Maximum-Intensity-Projection Images to Improve Detection of Ureteral Stones at Abdominal Radiography

The purpose of this study was to assess the improvement in the detection of ureteral stones on abdominal radiographs when the stones were viewed on multislice helical CT scans and maximum-intensity-projection (MIP) images. The study included 72 patients with renal colic who underwent abdominal radio...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	American journal of roentgenology (1976) Vol. 177; no. 5; pp. 1117 - 1121
Main Authors:	Van Beers, Bernard E, Dechambre, Stephane, Hulcelle, Pierre, Materne, Roland, Jamart, Jacques
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	Leesburg, VA Am Roentgen Ray Soc 01-11-2001 American Roentgen Ray Society
Subjects:	Adult Aged Biological and medical sciences Colic - diagnostic imaging Female Humans Image Enhancement Kidney Diseases - diagnostic imaging Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases Sensitivity and Specificity Tomography, X-Ray Computed Ureteral Calculi - diagnostic imaging Urinary lithiasis Human Urinary system disease Radiodiagnosis Intensity Ureteral disease Urinary tract disease Retrospective Urinary stone Abdomen Radiography Improvement Maximum Image projection Renal colic Lithiasis Medical imagery Multislice Helical structure Computerized axial tomography Diagnosis Technique Ureter
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	The purpose of this study was to assess the improvement in the detection of ureteral stones on abdominal radiographs when the stones were viewed on multislice helical CT scans and maximum-intensity-projection (MIP) images. The study included 72 patients with renal colic who underwent abdominal radiography and multislice helical CT. For each patient, a frontal MIP image was generated, and the stone, when present, was marked with a cross on the transverse CT scan. The cross appeared automatically on the corresponding MIP image. The CT examination was used as the standard of reference. The presence and location of ureteral stones on the abdominal radiographs were assessed during three interpretation sessions. In the first session, the abdominal radiographs were viewed alone. In the second, they were viewed with the transverse CT scans. In the third, the abdominal radiographs were viewed with the CT scans and the MIP images. Ureteral stones were present in 58 patients. The percentage of stones detected on the abdominal radiographs was 45% when the radiographs were viewed alone, 66% when they were viewed with the CT scans (p = 0.002 vs radiographs alone), and 78% when viewed with the CT scans and MIP images (p = 0.016 vs radiographs with CT scans). The sensitivity of stone detection on abdominal radiographs was greatest when the interpreters viewed the radiographs in conjunction with the CT scans and MIP images.
Bibliography:	ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23
ISSN:	0361-803X 1546-3141
DOI:	10.2214/ajr.177.5.1771117