Evaluation of virtual unenhanced CT obtained from dual-energy CT urography for detecting urinary stones.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to determine if virtual unenhanced CT (VUCT) is equivalent to unenhanced CT (UCT) for detecting urinary stones.

METHODS

Our institutional review board approved this retrospective study, which was compliant with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. A total of 80 stones were detected in 32 patients among 146 consecutive patients undergoing dual-energy CT urography. The number and size of stones were recorded on nephrographic VUCT (NVUCT) and excretory VUCT (EVUCT) images, respectively. UCT was a reference of standard for the number and size of stones. Image quality of VUCT was qualitatively assessed using a five-point scale. Repeated-measures analysis of variance with post-test was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

62 stones in 29 patients were detected on NVUCT and 59 stones in 27 patients were detected on EVUCT. The size of stones detected on NVUCT or EVUCT was significantly smaller compared with stones on UCT (p<0.05). The size of stones detected on UCT, NVUCT and EVUCT ranged from 1.4 to 19.2 mm (mean, 4.6 mm), 0 to 19.2 mm (mean, 3.6 mm) and 0 to 18.7 mm (mean, 3.6 mm), respectively. 18 stones were missed on NVUCT and 21 were missed on EVUCT. The sizes ranged from 1.4 to 3.2 mm (mean, 2.1 mm) and 1.4 to 3.2 mm (mean, 2.2 mm) on UCT, respectively. VUCT was inferior to UCT regarding image quality (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

VUCT missed a significant number of small stones probably owing to poor image quality compared with UCT. Subsequently, VUCT cannot replace UCT for detecting urinary stones.