Ultrasonographic Diagnosis of Renal Stones

Juul, Niels; Holm-Bentzen, M.; Rygaard, H.; Holm, Hans Henrik

doi:10.3109/00365598709180308

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This difference may be partly explained by the different diagnostic modalities: sonographic demonstration of renal stones smaller than 5 mm cannot be expected from the available technology (10,11,14) and conventional radiography cannot detect nonopaque stones. Geographic difference in kidney stone prevalence may be another explanation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sonographic Evaluation of Renal Appearance in 665 Adult Volunteers

et al. 1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to investigate the sonographic appearance of the normal adult kidney. Parenchymal echogenicity, pyramid visibility, and transverse pelvis diameter of the kidneys were prospectively determined in an age-and sex-stratified random sample of 665 volunteers 30, 40, 50, 60, and 70 years old. Furthermore, incidences of kidney stones and split sinus echo were determined. The relation between obesity and above-mentioned parameters was evaluated. In the 30-year-old age group the right kidney was isoechoic as compared to the liver in 1/3, and had clearly or faintly visible pyramids in 2/3 of the cases. These rates decreased gradually with increasing age. Transverse diameter of renal pelvis 10 mm was observed in 13% of participants. Renal stones were observed in 2.1%. The incidence of split sinus echo was 3.6%. Obese participants showed lower incidences of isoechogenicity, pyramid visibility,pelvic ectasia, and split sinus echo. Isoechoic parenchyma, clearly visible pyramids, and transverse pelvis diameter~10 mm are not uncommon sonographic findings in normal adult kidneys and should not be used as indicators of renal pathology.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sonographic Evaluation of Renal Appearance in 665 Adult Volunteers

et al. 1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The poor sensitivity and the high false negative rates (41%) of USG demonstrated in this study are related to multiple factors. Calculi may be missed at USG due to lack of acoustic shadowing of the calculus [19] . The other factors would be the body habitus, 6 the selection of the transducer power, and focal length [20] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative study of ultrasound and computerized tomography for nephrolithiasis detection

Ahmed¹,

Ahemad²,

Ahmed³

2020

Int. J. Radiol. Diagn. Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There is a lack of consensus about whether the initial imaging method for patients with suspected nephrolithiasis should be computed tomography (CT) or ultrasonography. Material and Methods: A total of 130 patients' USG and CTU were compared for the presence of calculi. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of USG were calculated with CTU as the gold standard. Results: From the 150 sets of data collected, 45 calculi were detected on both USG and CTU. The sensitivity and specificity of renal calculi detection on USG were 53% and 85% respectively. The mean size of the renal calculus detected on USG was 6.8 mm ± 3.8 mm and the mean size of the renal calculus not visualized on USG but detected on CTU was 3.5 mm ± 2.7 mm. The sensitivity and specificity of ureteric calculi detection on USG were 12% and 97% respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of urinary bladder calculi detection on USG were 20% and 100% respectively. Conclusion: This study showed that the accuracy of US in detecting renal, ureteric and urinary bladder calculi were 68%, 80% And 99% Respectively.

show abstract

“…[4540] The importance of helical CT without contrast in children back to the importance of renal stone in this group because of etiologic finding such as hypercalciuria and renal malformation are two common findings in this group. [39] In other studies normal urine analysis considered as a clue for give a diagnosis of microcalculi.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The comparison of ultrasound and non-contrast helical computerized tomography for children nephrolithiasis detection

Malaki

2014

Urol Ann

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims:Nephrolithiasis is less common in children than adults, but its diagnosis and management in children may be more perplexing. In this article, we compare two imaging ultrasound (US) and non-contrast helical computerized tomography (CT) for diagnosis of nephrolithiasis.Subjects and Methods:A total of 20 children who diagnosed as nephrolithiasis by US were imaged simultaneously by non-contrast helical CT. Their history like as family history in first and second degree relatives and urine analysis for hematuria and urine randomly calcium to creatinine ratio was obtained. All data analyzed by χ2 and Mann-Whitney U-test in SPSS 16 and P < 0.05 was considered to be significant.Results:Out of 20 cases, only 5 cases diagnosed as nephrlithiasis by US were confirmed by CT method 2 out of 20 cases had another extrarenal origin for their complaint who diagnosed wrongly as nephrolithiasis by US. Stone size based of US that was confirmed by CT method was larger 4.6 ± 1.5 (minimum 3 max 6 mm) than non-confirmed ones 2.3 ± 0.7 mm (P 0.002). Hematuria occurred more in correct diagnosed compared with misdiagnosed (P 0.005). Positive family history and urine calcium ratio was not differed between two groups.Conclusions:Non contrast helical CT is essential to confirm of nephrolithiasis and other extrarenal origin of complaints, which diagnosed wrongly as nephrolithiasis in children. Stone size and presence of hematuria are two major factors for right diagnosis of nephrolithiasis as US method but Urine calcium excretion ratio or positive family history cannot be predictive as this study.

show abstract

Ultrasonographic Diagnosis of Renal Stones

Cited by 15 publications

References 3 publications

Sonographic Evaluation of Renal Appearance in 665 Adult Volunteers

Sonographic Evaluation of Renal Appearance in 665 Adult Volunteers

Comparative study of ultrasound and computerized tomography for nephrolithiasis detection

The comparison of ultrasound and non-contrast helical computerized tomography for children nephrolithiasis detection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About