Plain abdominal x-ray versus computerized tomography screening: sensitivity for stone localization after nonenhanced spiral computerized tomography.

PURPOSE

Urolithiasis followup with plain abdominal x-ray requires adequate visualization of the calculus on the initial x-ray or computerized tomography (CT) study. We compared the sensitivity of plain abdominal x-ray versus CT for stone localization after positive nonenhanced spiral CT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated 46 consecutive nonenhanced spiral CT studies positive for upper urinary tract lithiasis for which concurrent plain abdominal x-rays were available. X-ray and CT studies were compared for the ability to visualize retrospectively a stone given its location by CT. A consensus of 1 radiologist and 3 urologists was reached in each case. Cross-sectional stone size and maximum length were measured on plain abdominal x-ray.

RESULTS

Plain abdominal x-ray and scout CT had 48% (22 of 46 cases) and 17% (8 of 46) sensitivity, respectively, for detecting the index stone (p <0.00004). Of the 39 stones overall visualized on plain abdominal x-ray only 19 (49%) were visualized on scout CT. Mean cross-sectional area and length of the stones on scout CT were 0.34 cm.2 (approximately 6 x 5.5 mm.) and 6. 5 mm., respectively, while the average size of those missed was 0.11 cm.2 (approximately 4 x 3 mm.) and 3.6 mm. The mean size differences in the groups were highly significant (p <0.0009).

CONCLUSIONS

Plain abdominal x-ray is more sensitive than scout CT for detecting radiopaque nephrolithiasis. Of the stones visible on plain abdominal x-ray 51% were not seen on CT. To facilitate outpatient clinic followup of patients with calculi plain abdominal x-ray should be performed when a stone is not clearly visible on scout CT.