Suppr超能文献

与低剂量非增强计算机断层扫描相比,超声检查显著高估结石大小。

Ultrasonography Significantly Overestimates Stone Size When Compared to Low-dose, Noncontrast Computed Tomography.

作者信息

Sternberg Kevan M, Eisner Brian, Larson Troy, Hernandez Natalia, Han Jullet, Pais Vernon M

机构信息

Division of Urology, University of Vermont Medical Center, Burlington, VT.

Department of Urology, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.

出版信息

Urology. 2016 Sep;95:67-71. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2016.06.002. Epub 2016 Jun 8.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the differences between low-dose noncontrast computed tomography (NCCT) and renal ultrasound (US) in the identification and measurement of urinary calculi.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted at 3 institutions of patients evaluated for flank pain with both renal US and NCCT, within 1 day of one another, from 2012 to 2015. Stone presence and size were compared between imaging modalities. Stone size was determined by largest measured diameter. Stones were grouped into size categories (≤5 mm, 5.1-10 mm, and >10 mm) based on NCCT and compared with US. Statistical analysis was performed using 2-sided t tests.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-five patients received both a renal US and NCCT within 1 day. In 79 patients (51.0%), both US and NCCT identified a stone for size comparison. Fifty-eight patients (37.4%) had a stone visualized on NCCT but not on US, and 2 patients (1.3%) had a stone documented on US but not seen on NCCT. The average NCCT size of the stones missed on US was 4.5 mm. When comparing the average largest stone diameter for US (9.1 mm) vs NCCT (6.9 mm), US overestimated stone size by 2.2 mm (P < .001). US overestimated stone size by 84.6% for stones ≤5 mm, 27.1% for stones 5.1-10 mm, and 3.0% for stones >10 mm.

CONCLUSION

US significantly overestimated stone size and this was most pronounced for small (≤5 mm) stones. The potential for systematic overestimation of stone size with standard US techniques should be taken into consideration when evaluating endourologic treatment options.

摘要

目的

评估低剂量非增强计算机断层扫描(NCCT)与肾脏超声(US)在尿路结石识别和测量方面的差异。

材料与方法

对2012年至2015年期间在3家机构进行评估的患者进行回顾性研究,这些患者因胁腹疼痛在1天内先后接受了肾脏超声和NCCT检查。比较两种成像方式下结石的存在情况和大小。结石大小通过最大测量直径确定。根据NCCT将结石分为不同大小类别(≤5毫米、5.1 - 10毫米和>10毫米),并与超声检查结果进行比较。使用双侧t检验进行统计分析。

结果

155例患者在1天内接受了肾脏超声和NCCT检查。79例患者(51.0%)的超声和NCCT均发现结石可供大小比较。58例患者(37.4%)的结石在NCCT上可见但超声未发现,2例患者(1.3%)的结石在超声上有记录但NCCT未发现。超声未发现的结石在NCCT上的平均大小为4.5毫米。比较超声(9.1毫米)与NCCT(6.9毫米)测得的平均最大结石直径,超声高估结石大小2.2毫米(P <.001)。对于≤5毫米的结石,超声高估结石大小84.6%;对于5.1 - 10毫米的结石,高估27.1%;对于>10毫米的结石,高估3.0%。

结论

超声显著高估了结石大小,在小结石(≤5毫米)中最为明显。在评估腔内泌尿外科治疗方案时,应考虑到标准超声技术系统性高估结石大小的可能性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验