PTU - Polskie Towarzystwo Urologiczne
home page
current numbers
archival numbers
list of articles:
list przewodni/covering letter
editor
Scientific Committee
publisher
subscription
advertising
important links

CT IN PATIENTS SUSPECTED OF UROLITHIASIS
Article published in Urologia Polska 2000/53/3.

authors

Andrzej Cieszanowski 1, Katarzyna Zaniewicz 2, Barbara Rożniatowska-Sadkowska 2, Tomasz Nadolski 3, Jan Skarbek-Kiełczewski 3, Jan Szymanowski 3
1 II Zakład Radiologii Klinicznej AM w Warszawie
Kierownik: B. Pruszyński
2 Zakład Rentgenodiagnostyki Szpitala Bielańskiego w Warszawie
Kierownik: K. Lerch
3 Oddział Urologii Szpitala Bielańskiego w Warszawie
Kierownik: J. Szymanowski

keywords

CT ?urolithiasis

summary

Objective, Evoluation of computed tomography in diagnosis of acute fhank
pain in patients suspected of ureteral stones.
Material and method. CT was performed in 30 patients with acute flank pain
in where IVP and USG were not enough to make the diagnosis.
Results. The final diagnosis was made in 21 patients. Sensityvity of the method
was 100%, probability of positive results - 88%. Out of 21 IVP were negative.
Conclusion. CT is an efective method in diagnosis of ureteral stones.

references

  1. [1] Fielding/ J. R., Silverman, S. G., Samuel, S. etal.: Unenhanced helical CT of
  2. ureteral stones: a replacement for excretory urography in planning treatment. AJR
  3. 1998, 171, 1051-1053.
  4. [2] Fielding, J. R., Steele, G., Fox, L. A. et al.: Spiral Computerized tomography in
  5. the evaluation of acute flank pain: replacement for eicretory urography. J. Urol. 1997,
  6. 157, 2071-2073.
  7. [3] Frola, C, Cantoni, S., Luminati, T. et al.: Differential features of distal calculi
  8. and pehic phleboliths at unenhanced helical CT (abstr.). Eur. Radiol. 1999, 9,457.
  9. [4] Haddad, M. C, Sharif, H. S., Shahed, M. S. et al.: Renal colic: diagnosis and
  10. outcome. Radiolh. 1992,184, 83-88.
  11. [5] Heneghan, J. R, Dalrymple, N. C, Verga, M. etal.: Soft-tissue "rim" sign in
  12. the diagnosis of ureteral calculi with use of unenhanced helical CT. Radiol. 1997,
  13. 202, 709-711.
  14. [6] Hill, M. C, Rich, J. I., Mardiat, J. G. et al.: Sonography versus excretory urog-
  15. raphy in acute flank pain. AJR 1985,144,1235-1238.
  16. [7] Katz, D. S., Lane, M. J., Sommer, F. G.: Non-contrast spiral CT for patients with
  17. suspected renal colic. Eur. Radiol. 1997, 7, 680-685.
  18. [8] Katz, D. S., Lane, M. J., Sommer, F. G.: Unenhanced helical CT of ureteral
  19. stones: incidence of associated urinary tract findings. AJR 1996,166,1319-1322.
  20. [9] Kawashima, A., Sandler, C. M., Boridy, I. C. et al.: Unenhanced helical CT of
  21. ureterolithiasis: value of the tissue rim sign. AJR 1997,168, 997-1000.
  22. [10] Laing, F. C, Jeffrey, R. B. Jr, Wing, V. W.: Ultrasoundversusexcretory urogra-
  23. phy in evaluating acute flank pain. Radiol. 1985,154, 613-616.
  24. [11] Lanoue, M. 2, Mindell, H. J.: The use of unenhanced helical CT to evaluate
  25. suspected renal colic. AJR 1997,169,1579-1584.
  26. [12] Newhouse, J. H., Prien, E. L., Amis, E. S. Jr, et al.: Computed tomographic
  27. analysis of urinary calculi. AJR 1984,142, 545-548.
  28. [13] Smith, R. C, Rosenfield, A. T., Choe, K. A. et al.: Acute flank pain: Compari-
  29. son of non-contrast-enhanced CT and intravenous urography. Radiol. 1995,194,
  30. 789-794.
  31. [14] Smith, R. C, Verga, M., McCarthy, S., Rosenfield, A. T.: Diagnosis of acute
  32. flank pain: value of unenhanced helical CT. AJR 1996,166, 97-101.
  33. [15] Sommer, F. G., Jeffrey, R. B. Jr, Rubin, G. D. et al.: Detection of ureteral calculi
  34. in patients with suspected renal colic: value of reformated noncontrasthelical CT. AJR
  35. 1995, 165, 509-513.
  36. [16] Yilmaz, S., Sindel, T., Arslan, G. et al.: Renal colic: Comparison of spiral CT, US
  37. and IVU in the detection of ureteral calculi. Eur. Radiol. 1998, 8, 212-217.