Computed tomography window affects kidney stones measurements.
Kidney Calculi
Nephrolithiasis
Patient Outcome Assessment
Journal
International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
ISSN: 1677-6119
Titre abrégé: Int Braz J Urol
Pays: Brazil
ID NLM: 101158091
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
28
11
2018
accepted:
19
03
2019
pubmed:
4
7
2019
medline:
2
11
2019
entrez:
4
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Measurements of stone features may vary according to the non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) technique. Using magnified bone window is the most accurate method to measure urinary stones. Possible differences between stone measurements in different NCCT windows have not been evaluated in stones located in the kidney. The aim of this study is to compare measurements of kidney stone features between NCCT bone and soft tissue windows in patients submitted to retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Preoperative and 90th postoperative day NCCT were performed in 92 consecutive symptomatic adult patients (115 renal units) with kidney stones between 5 mm to 20 mm (< 15 mm in the lower calyx) treated by RIRS. NCCT were evaluated in the magnified bone window and soft tissue window in three axes in a different time by a single radiologist blinded for the measurements of the NCCT other method. Stone largest size (7.92±3.81 vs. 9.13±4.08; mm), volume (435.5±472.7 vs. 683.1±665.0; mm3) and density (989.4±330.2 vs. 893.0±324.6; HU) differed between bone and soft-tissue windows, respectively (p<0.0001) 5.2% of the renal units (6/115) were reclassified from residual fragments > 2 mm on soft tissue window to 0-2 mm on bone window. Kidney stone measurements vary according to NCCT window. Measurements in soft tissue window NCCT of stone diameter and volume are larger and stone density is lesser than in bone window. These differences may have impact on clinical decisions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31268643
doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2018.0819
pii: IBJU20180819
pmc: PMC6844354
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
948-955Informations de copyright
Copyright® by the International Brazilian Journal of Urology.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
None declared.
Références
J Urol. 2017 Mar;197(3 Pt 1):715-722
pubmed: 27984107
J Urol. 2016 Apr;195(4 Pt 1):982-6
pubmed: 26585680
J Urol. 2012 Dec;188(6):2246-51
pubmed: 23083650
World J Urol. 2017 Dec;35(12):1947-1954
pubmed: 28756558
Urology. 2000 Jun;55(6):816-9
pubmed: 10840083
Eur Urol. 2016 Mar;69(3):475-82
pubmed: 26344917
J Urol. 1999 Sep;162(3 Pt 1):688-90; discussion 690-1
pubmed: 10458343
Urology. 2012 Sep;80(3):524-8
pubmed: 22658621
BJU Int. 2015 Mar;115(3):446-51
pubmed: 24731157
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000 Aug;175(2):329-32
pubmed: 10915668
Urology. 2013 Feb;81(2):231-4
pubmed: 23374764
World J Urol. 2016 Jun;34(6):771-8
pubmed: 26497824
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Aug;191(2):396-401
pubmed: 18647908
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014 Dec;203(6):1230-5
pubmed: 25415699
J Endourol. 2014 Jun;28(6):704-7
pubmed: 24517291
J Urol. 2009 Apr;181(4):1710-5
pubmed: 19230922
Urolithiasis. 2013 Nov;41(6):517-22
pubmed: 23913111
Urol Res. 2005 Dec;33(6):481-2; author reply 483
pubmed: 16328499
Urology. 2004 May;63(5):823-6; discussion 826-7
pubmed: 15134954
J Endourol. 2018 Jul;32(7):597-602
pubmed: 29737199
World J Urol. 2016 Nov;34(11):1591-1597
pubmed: 27000560
Urology. 2008 Oct;72(4):761-4
pubmed: 18701151
Radiology. 2010 Apr;255(1):100-7
pubmed: 20308448
Int J Urol. 2007 Jul;14(7):665-7
pubmed: 17645618
Urology. 2013 Jul;82(1):22-6
pubmed: 23688376
Eur Radiol. 2011 Oct;21(10):2218-25
pubmed: 21698465
J Endourol. 2010 Jul;24(7):1169-73
pubmed: 20575686
BJU Int. 2014 Apr;113(4):610-4
pubmed: 24053445
J Endourol. 2015 May;29(5):504-11
pubmed: 25567006
J Urol. 2011 Mar;185(3):910-4
pubmed: 21239024
J Endourol. 2018 Dec;32(12):1108-1113
pubmed: 30398369
Urolithiasis. 2016 Nov;44(6):545-550
pubmed: 27023713