Comparison of helical computerized tomography and plain radiography for estimating urinary stone size

Narendra Narepalem, Chandru Sundaram, Illya C. Boridy, Yan Yan, Jay P. Heiken, Ralph V. Clayman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

58 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: We evaluated the accuracy of noncontrast spiral computerized tomography (CT) for determining urinary stone size compared with plain x-ray. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed noncontrast helical CT and plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder images of 39 patients with urolithiasis who underwent each study from July 1997 to February 1999. Stone size on x-ray was measured in the craniocaudal and transverse dimensions by a single radiologist (I.C.B.). The size of the same stone was then determined on blinded noncontrast spiral CT images. Stones that were less than 3 mm. were excluded from study. On CT estimated craniocaudal dimension was based on collimation thickness, the reconstruction interval and the number of images on which the stone was visualized. Results: We evaluated 58 stones 3 mm. or larger in the greatest dimension on plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder, and noncontrast spiral CT, including 15 in the distal ureter, 7 in the mid or proximal ureter and 36 in the kidneys. Stone size was 3 to 18 mm. in the greatest dimension. Mean transverse dimension of the stone plus or minus standard deviation on noncontrast spiral CT was 5.1 ± 1.08 versus 4.9 ± 1.08 mm. on plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder (paired t test; p = 0.335). The mean craniocaudal dimension on noncontrast spiral CT was 7.5 ± 1.98 versus 6.7 ± 1.98 mm. on plain x-ray paired t test (p = 0.005). Conclusions: Noncontrast spiral CT enables a similar measurement of stone size along the transverse dimension as plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder. In individuals noncontrast spiral CT does not accurately measure the craniocaudal dimension of stones compared with plain x-ray when standard acquisition and reconstruction techniques are used. In this regard it has a tendency to overestimate stone size by an average of 0.8 mm.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1235-1238
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume167
Issue number3
StatePublished - 2002
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Urinary Calculi
Spiral Computed Tomography
Radiography
Ureter
Tomography
X-Rays
Kidney
Urinary Bladder
Urolithiasis

Keywords

  • Calculi
  • Kidney
  • Tomography
  • Ureter
  • Urinary tract
  • X-ray computed

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Narepalem, N., Sundaram, C., Boridy, I. C., Yan, Y., Heiken, J. P., & Clayman, R. V. (2002). Comparison of helical computerized tomography and plain radiography for estimating urinary stone size. Journal of Urology, 167(3), 1235-1238.

Comparison of helical computerized tomography and plain radiography for estimating urinary stone size. / Narepalem, Narendra; Sundaram, Chandru; Boridy, Illya C.; Yan, Yan; Heiken, Jay P.; Clayman, Ralph V.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 167, No. 3, 2002, p. 1235-1238.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Narepalem, N, Sundaram, C, Boridy, IC, Yan, Y, Heiken, JP & Clayman, RV 2002, 'Comparison of helical computerized tomography and plain radiography for estimating urinary stone size', Journal of Urology, vol. 167, no. 3, pp. 1235-1238.
Narepalem, Narendra ; Sundaram, Chandru ; Boridy, Illya C. ; Yan, Yan ; Heiken, Jay P. ; Clayman, Ralph V. / Comparison of helical computerized tomography and plain radiography for estimating urinary stone size. In: Journal of Urology. 2002 ; Vol. 167, No. 3. pp. 1235-1238.
@article{9c0622b731a7430eb918825ef2dcbe92,
title = "Comparison of helical computerized tomography and plain radiography for estimating urinary stone size",
abstract = "Purpose: We evaluated the accuracy of noncontrast spiral computerized tomography (CT) for determining urinary stone size compared with plain x-ray. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed noncontrast helical CT and plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder images of 39 patients with urolithiasis who underwent each study from July 1997 to February 1999. Stone size on x-ray was measured in the craniocaudal and transverse dimensions by a single radiologist (I.C.B.). The size of the same stone was then determined on blinded noncontrast spiral CT images. Stones that were less than 3 mm. were excluded from study. On CT estimated craniocaudal dimension was based on collimation thickness, the reconstruction interval and the number of images on which the stone was visualized. Results: We evaluated 58 stones 3 mm. or larger in the greatest dimension on plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder, and noncontrast spiral CT, including 15 in the distal ureter, 7 in the mid or proximal ureter and 36 in the kidneys. Stone size was 3 to 18 mm. in the greatest dimension. Mean transverse dimension of the stone plus or minus standard deviation on noncontrast spiral CT was 5.1 ± 1.08 versus 4.9 ± 1.08 mm. on plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder (paired t test; p = 0.335). The mean craniocaudal dimension on noncontrast spiral CT was 7.5 ± 1.98 versus 6.7 ± 1.98 mm. on plain x-ray paired t test (p = 0.005). Conclusions: Noncontrast spiral CT enables a similar measurement of stone size along the transverse dimension as plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder. In individuals noncontrast spiral CT does not accurately measure the craniocaudal dimension of stones compared with plain x-ray when standard acquisition and reconstruction techniques are used. In this regard it has a tendency to overestimate stone size by an average of 0.8 mm.",
keywords = "Calculi, Kidney, Tomography, Ureter, Urinary tract, X-ray computed",
author = "Narendra Narepalem and Chandru Sundaram and Boridy, {Illya C.} and Yan Yan and Heiken, {Jay P.} and Clayman, {Ralph V.}",
year = "2002",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "167",
pages = "1235--1238",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of helical computerized tomography and plain radiography for estimating urinary stone size

AU - Narepalem, Narendra

AU - Sundaram, Chandru

AU - Boridy, Illya C.

AU - Yan, Yan

AU - Heiken, Jay P.

AU - Clayman, Ralph V.

PY - 2002

Y1 - 2002

N2 - Purpose: We evaluated the accuracy of noncontrast spiral computerized tomography (CT) for determining urinary stone size compared with plain x-ray. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed noncontrast helical CT and plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder images of 39 patients with urolithiasis who underwent each study from July 1997 to February 1999. Stone size on x-ray was measured in the craniocaudal and transverse dimensions by a single radiologist (I.C.B.). The size of the same stone was then determined on blinded noncontrast spiral CT images. Stones that were less than 3 mm. were excluded from study. On CT estimated craniocaudal dimension was based on collimation thickness, the reconstruction interval and the number of images on which the stone was visualized. Results: We evaluated 58 stones 3 mm. or larger in the greatest dimension on plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder, and noncontrast spiral CT, including 15 in the distal ureter, 7 in the mid or proximal ureter and 36 in the kidneys. Stone size was 3 to 18 mm. in the greatest dimension. Mean transverse dimension of the stone plus or minus standard deviation on noncontrast spiral CT was 5.1 ± 1.08 versus 4.9 ± 1.08 mm. on plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder (paired t test; p = 0.335). The mean craniocaudal dimension on noncontrast spiral CT was 7.5 ± 1.98 versus 6.7 ± 1.98 mm. on plain x-ray paired t test (p = 0.005). Conclusions: Noncontrast spiral CT enables a similar measurement of stone size along the transverse dimension as plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder. In individuals noncontrast spiral CT does not accurately measure the craniocaudal dimension of stones compared with plain x-ray when standard acquisition and reconstruction techniques are used. In this regard it has a tendency to overestimate stone size by an average of 0.8 mm.

AB - Purpose: We evaluated the accuracy of noncontrast spiral computerized tomography (CT) for determining urinary stone size compared with plain x-ray. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed noncontrast helical CT and plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder images of 39 patients with urolithiasis who underwent each study from July 1997 to February 1999. Stone size on x-ray was measured in the craniocaudal and transverse dimensions by a single radiologist (I.C.B.). The size of the same stone was then determined on blinded noncontrast spiral CT images. Stones that were less than 3 mm. were excluded from study. On CT estimated craniocaudal dimension was based on collimation thickness, the reconstruction interval and the number of images on which the stone was visualized. Results: We evaluated 58 stones 3 mm. or larger in the greatest dimension on plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder, and noncontrast spiral CT, including 15 in the distal ureter, 7 in the mid or proximal ureter and 36 in the kidneys. Stone size was 3 to 18 mm. in the greatest dimension. Mean transverse dimension of the stone plus or minus standard deviation on noncontrast spiral CT was 5.1 ± 1.08 versus 4.9 ± 1.08 mm. on plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder (paired t test; p = 0.335). The mean craniocaudal dimension on noncontrast spiral CT was 7.5 ± 1.98 versus 6.7 ± 1.98 mm. on plain x-ray paired t test (p = 0.005). Conclusions: Noncontrast spiral CT enables a similar measurement of stone size along the transverse dimension as plain x-ray of the kidneys, ureters and bladder. In individuals noncontrast spiral CT does not accurately measure the craniocaudal dimension of stones compared with plain x-ray when standard acquisition and reconstruction techniques are used. In this regard it has a tendency to overestimate stone size by an average of 0.8 mm.

KW - Calculi

KW - Kidney

KW - Tomography

KW - Ureter

KW - Urinary tract

KW - X-ray computed

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036160513&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036160513&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 167

SP - 1235

EP - 1238

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 3

ER -