HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 2292021261v1 229/2/575    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Heneghan, J. P. Articles by Nelson, R. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Heneghan, J. P. Articles by Nelson, R. C.

Helical CT for Nephrolithiasis and Ureterolithiasis: Comparison of Conventional and Reduced Radiation-Dose Techniques¹

¹ From the Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. From the 2002 RSNA scientific assembly. Received October 8, 2002; revision requested December 17; revision received January 27, 2003; accepted March 10. Address correspondence to J.P.H., Department of Radiology, Waterford Regional Hospital, Waterford, Ireland (e-mail: heneghanj@sehb.ie).

PURPOSE: To determine the accuracy of unenhanced helical computed tomography (CT) performed at reduced milliampere-second, and therefore at a reduced patient radiation dose, by using conventional unenhanced helical CT as the standard.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients with acute flank pain who weighed less than 200 lb (90 kg) were prospectively recruited for this study. Conventional helical CT scans were obtained with patients in the prone position by using 5-mm-thick sections, 140 kVp, 135–208 mAs (mean, 160 mAs), and a pitch of 1.5 (single–detector row CT) or 0.75 (multi–detector row CT, 4 x 5-mm detector configuration). Conventional CT was immediately followed by low-dose scanning, whereby the tube current was reduced to 100 mA (mean, 76 mAs). All other technical parameters and anatomic coverage remained constant. Three independent readers who were blinded to patient identity interpreted the scans in random order. The observers noted the location, size, and number of calculi; secondary signs of obstruction; and other clinically relevant findings. High- and low-dose scans were compared by using paired t tests and the signed rank test.

RESULTS: Calculi were found in 33 (66%) patients; 25 (50%) had renal calculi and 19 (38%) had an obstructing ureteral calculus. The accuracy rates (averaged over the three readers) for determining the various findings on the low-dose scan compared with the high-dose scan were as follows: nephrolithiasis, 91%; ureterolithiasis, 94%; obstruction, 91%; and normal findings, 92%. When interpretations between readers were compared, agreement rates were 90%–95% for standard-dose scans and 90%–92% for reduced-dose scans (P > .5). Uncomplicated mild diverticulitis was found in three patients. No other clinically important abnormality was identified. A reduction in the tube current to 100 mA resulted in a dose reduction of 25% for multi–detector row CT and 42% for single–detector row CT.

CONCLUSION: In patients who weighed less than 200 lb, unenhanced helical CT performed at a reduced tube current of 100 mA, and therefore at a reduced patient dose, resulted in scans of high accuracy.

© RSNA, 2003

Index terms: Computed tomography (CT), helical, 81.12115, 82.12115 • Kidney, calculi, 81.81 • Phantoms • Radiations, exposure to patients and personnel • Ureter, calculi, 82.81

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. Niemann, T. Kollmann, and G. Bongartz Diagnostic Performance of Low-Dose CT for the Detection of Urolithiasis: A Meta-Analysis Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2008; 191(2): 396 - 401. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. K. Paulson, C. Weaver, L. M. Ho, L. Martin, J. Li, J. Darsie, and D. P. Frush Conventional and Reduced Radiation Dose of 16-MDCT for Detection of Nephrolithiasis and Ureterolithiasis Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2008; 190(1): 151 - 157. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Memarsadeghi, C. Schaefer-Prokop, M. Prokop, T. H. Helbich, C. C. Seitz, I. M. Noebauer-Huhmann, and G. Heinz-Peer Unenhanced MDCT in Patients with Suspected Urinary Stone Disease: Do Coronal Reformations Improve Diagnostic Performance? Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2007; 189(2): W60 - W64. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. C. Lucey, J. C. Varghese, A. Hochberg, M. A. Blake, and J. A. Soto CT-Guided Intervention with Low Radiation Dose: Feasibility and Experience Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2007; 188(5): 1187 - 1194. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. T. Yoshizumi, P. C. Goodman, D. P. Frush, G. Nguyen, G. Toncheva, M. Sarder, and L. Barnes Validation of Metal Oxide Semiconductor Field Effect Transistor Technology for Organ Dose Assessment During CT: Comparison with Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Am. J. Roentgenol., May 1, 2007; 188(5): 1332 - 1336. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P.-A. Poletti, A. Platon, O. T. Rutschmann, F. R. Schmidlin, C. E. Iselin, and C. D. Becker Low-Dose Versus Standard-Dose CT Protocol in Patients with Clinically Suspected Renal Colic Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2007; 188(4): 927 - 933. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. H. Mulkens, S. Daineffe, R. De Wijngaert, P. Bellinck, A. Leonard, G. Smet, and J.-L. Termote Urinary Stone Disease: Comparison of Standard-Dose and Low-Dose with 4D MDCT Tube Current Modulation Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2007; 188(2): 553 - 562. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. I. Katz, S. Saluja, J. A. Brink, and H. P. Forman Radiation Dose Associated with Unenhanced CT for Suspected Renal Colic: Impact of Repetitive Studies. Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2006; 186(4): 1120 - 1124. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. W. Stuhlfaut, B. C. Lucey, J. C. Varghese, and J. A. Soto Blunt Abdominal Trauma: Utility of 5-minute Delayed CT with a Reduced Radiation Dose Radiology, February 1, 2006; 238(2): 473 - 479. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S J Freeman and H Sells Investigation of loin pain Imaging, August 1, 2005; 17(1): 19 - 33. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kirpalani, K. Khalili, S. Lee, and M. A. Haider Renal Colic: Comparison of Use and Outcomes of Unenhanced Helical CT for Emergency Investigation in 1998 and 2002 Radiology, August 1, 2005; 236(2): 554 - 558. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Memarsadeghi, G. Heinz-Peer, T. H. Helbich, C. Schaefer-Prokop, G. Kramer, M. Scharitzer, and M. Prokop Unenhanced Multi-Detector Row CT in Patients Suspected of Having Urinary Stone Disease: Effect of Section Width on Diagnosis Radiology, May 1, 2005; 235(2): 530 - 536. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. K. Kalra, M. M. Maher, R. V. D'Souza, S. Rizzo, E. F. Halpern, M. A. Blake, and S. Saini Detection of Urinary Tract Stones at Low-Radiation-Dose CT with Z-Axis Automatic Tube Current Modulation: Phantom and Clinical Studies Radiology, May 1, 2005; 235(2): 523 - 529. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. S. Katz, M. Jain, M. J. Lane, E. M. Meiner, S. Bhalla, C. O. Menias, and C. M. Rucker Invited Commentary * Authors' Response RadioGraphics, October 1, 2004; 24(suppl_1): S28 - S33. [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Keyzer, D. Tack, V. de Maertelaer, P. Bohy, P. A. Gevenois, and D. Van Gansbeke Acute Appendicitis: Comparison of Low-Dose and Standard-Dose Unenhanced Multi-Detector Row CT Radiology, July 1, 2004; 232(1): 164 - 172. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]