BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

British Journal of Radiology (2005) 78, 506-511
© 2005 British Institute of Radiology
doi: 10.1259/bjr/22314006

This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Regan, F
Right arrow Articles by Jackman, S
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Regan, F
Right arrow Articles by Jackman, S

Full Paper

Acute ureteric calculus obstruction: unenhanced spiral CT versus HASTE MR urography and abdominal radiograph

F Regan, MD, FRCR1, B Kuszyk, MD1, M E Bohlman, MD1 and S Jackman, MD2

Departments of 1 Imaging and 2 Urology, Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, 4940 Eastern Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland 21224, USA

Correspondence: Dr F Regan, Department of Radiology, Adelaide & Meath Hospital, Dublin 24, Ireland

The aim of this study is to compare the performance of unenhanced spiral CT to the combination of HASTE MR urography (MRU) and plain abdominal radiography (KUB) in patients suspected of having acute calculus ureteric obstruction. 64 patients with suspected acute calculus ureteric obstruction were evaluated. The presence of perirenal fluid, presence and level of ureteric obstruction and calculi were assessed on both techniques. 44 of 64 (69%) patients had acute calculus ureteric obstruction based on clinical, radiographic or surgical findings. MRU showed perirenal fluid in acute ureteric obstruction (77%) with a greater sensitivity than CT showed stranding (45%). The combination of fluid and ureteric dilation on MRU showed a sensitivity of 93% (CT 80%), specificity of 95% (CT 85%), and accuracy of 94% (CT 81%). There were 61 findings of either fluid or ureteric dilatation on MRU in 44 acutely obstructed kidneys compared with 37 similar findings on CT (p<0.005). Although there was excellent reproducibility (Kappa=>ge;0.75) in the finding of perirenal fluid on MRU, there was only fair interobserver agreement (Kappa<0.4) regarding perirenal stranding on CT. MRU/KUB showed ureteric calculi in 21/29 (72%) of patients with calculi seen by CT. Overall, MRU/KUB revealed 2.4 abnormalities per acutely obstructed ureter compared with 1.8 abnormalities detected by CT. MRU/KUB using HASTE sequences can diagnose the presence of acute calculus ureteric obstruction with similar accuracy to spiral CT. The technique has less observer variability and is more accurate than CT in detecting evidence of obstruction such as perirenal fluid.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
K. Togashi
Invited Commentary
RadioGraphics, July 1, 2007; 27(4): 917 - 918.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JNMHome page
A. Boubaker, J. O. Prior, J.-Y. Meuwly, and A. Bischof-Delaloye
Radionuclide Investigations of the Urinary Tract in the Era of Multimodality Imaging
J. Nucl. Med., November 1, 2006; 47(11): 1819 - 1836.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 2005 by the British Institute of Radiology.