Suppr超能文献

超声检查对肾结石检测及大小测定的准确性:其对于治疗决策而言是否足够可靠?

Accuracy of ultrasonography for renal stone detection and size determination: is it good enough for management decisions?

作者信息

Ganesan Vishnu, De Shubha, Greene Daniel, Torricelli Fabio Cesar Miranda, Monga Manoj

机构信息

Glickman Urological Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.

Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.

出版信息

BJU Int. 2017 Mar;119(3):464-469. doi: 10.1111/bju.13605. Epub 2016 Aug 17.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To determine the sensitivity and specificity of ultrasonography (US) for detecting renal calculi and to assess the accuracy of US for determining the size of calculi and how this can affect counselling decisions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively identified all patients at our institution with a diagnosis of nephrolithiasis who underwent US followed by non-contrast computed tomography (CT) within 60 days. Data on patient characteristics, stone size (maximum axial diameter) and stone location were collected. The sensitivity, specificity and size accuracy of US was determined using CT as the standard.

RESULTS

A total of 552 US and CT examinations met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the sensitivity and specificity of US was 54 and 91%, respectively. There was a significant association between sensitivity of US and stone size (P < 0.001), but not with stone location (P = 0.58). US significantly overestimated the size of stones in the 0-10 mm range (P < 0.001). Assuming patients with stones 0-4 mm in size will be selected for observation and those with stones ≥5 mm could be counselled on the alternative of intervention, we found that in 14% (54/384) of cases where CT would suggest observation, US would lead to a recommendation for intervention. By contrast, when CT results would suggest intervention as management, US would suggest observation in 39% (65/168) of cases. An average of 22% (119/552) of patients could be inappropriately counselled. Stones classified as 5-10 mm according to US had the highest probability (43% [41/96]) of having their management recommendation changed when CT was performed. The use of plain abdominal film of kidney, ureter and bladder and US increases sensitivity (78%), but 37% (13/35) of patients may still be counselled inappropriately to undergo observation.

CONCLUSIONS

Using US to guide clinical decision-making for residual or asymptomatic calculi is limited by low sensitivity and inability to size the stone accurately. As a result, one in five patients may be inappropriately counselled when using US alone.

摘要

目的

确定超声检查(US)检测肾结石的敏感性和特异性,并评估US测定结石大小的准确性以及这如何影响咨询决策。

材料与方法

我们回顾性地确定了本机构所有诊断为肾结石且在60天内接受了US检查随后又进行了非增强计算机断层扫描(CT)的患者。收集了患者特征、结石大小(最大轴向直径)和结石位置的数据。以CT作为标准确定US的敏感性、特异性和大小准确性。

结果

共有552次US和CT检查符合纳入标准。总体而言,US的敏感性和特异性分别为54%和91%。US的敏感性与结石大小之间存在显著关联(P < 0.001),但与结石位置无关(P = 0.58)。US显著高估了0 - 10 mm范围内结石的大小(P < 0.001)。假设选择0 - 4 mm大小结石的患者进行观察,而结石≥5 mm的患者可接受干预替代方案的咨询,我们发现,在CT提示观察的病例中,有14%(54/384)的病例US会导致建议进行干预。相比之下,当CT结果提示干预作为治疗方案时,US在39%(65/168)的病例中会建议观察。平均有22%(119/552)的患者可能会得到不恰当的咨询。根据US分类为5 - 10 mm的结石在进行CT检查时其治疗建议改变的可能性最高(43% [41/96])。使用肾脏、输尿管和膀胱的腹部平片及US可提高敏感性(78%),但仍有37%(13/35)的患者可能会被不恰当地建议进行观察。

结论

使用US指导残余或无症状结石的临床决策受到敏感性低和无法准确测量结石大小的限制。因此,仅使用US时,五分之一的患者可能会得到不恰当的咨询。

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