Effectiveness of selective use of intravenous pyelography in patients presenting to the emergency department with ureteral colic.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether i.v. pyelography (IVP) is required routinely for all patients presenting to the ED with ureteral colic.

METHODS

A randomized prospective study was conducted with 2 patient group-a routine IVP group, in which all patients underwent IVP, and a selective IVP group, in which patients were treated, observed, and released without undergoing IVP unless they experienced continued symptoms. The study was performed in a large university-affiliated, community hospital ED. Participants were patients aged 18-65 years with signs and symptoms consistent with ureteral colic.

RESULTS

Among the 40 patients enrolled in the routine IVP group, 26 had positive studies, 8 of which necessitated hospitalization. Among the 41 patients randomized to the selective IVP group, there were only 19 IVPs performed, of which 6 were positive and 4 necessitated hospitalization. Compared with the routine IVP group, there were 54% fewer IVPs performed and a 51% lower admission rate in the selective IVP group. Despite the fact that fewer IVPs were performed in the selective IVP group, clinical outcomes in the 2 groups were similar, without significant complication in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

IVPs do not need to be routinely performed for all patients presenting to the ED with ureteral colic. The decision to perform an IVP may be dictated by symptoms that persist after initial evaluation and treatment.