Computed tomography window affects kidney stones measurements

Imagem de Miniatura
Arquivos
art_DANILOVIC_Computed_tomography_window_affects_kidney_stones_measurements_2019.PDF (2.7 MB)
Citações na Scopus
17
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2019
DOI
SciELO
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
BRAZILIAN SOC UROL
Autores
TRAXER, Olivier
Citação
INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, v.45, n.5, p.948-955, 2019
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Objectives: Measurements of stone features may vary according to the non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) technique. Using magnified bone window is the most accurate method to measure urinary stones. Possible differences between stone measurements in different NCCT windows have not been evaluated in stones located in the kidney. The aim of this study is to compare measurements of kidney stone features between NCCT bone and soft tissue windows in patients submitted to retrograde intra-renal surgery (RIRS). Materials and Methods: Preoperative and 90th postoperative day NCCT were performed in 92 consecutive symptomatic adult patients (115 renal units) with kidney stones between 5 mm to 20 mm (< 15 mm in the lower calyx) treated by RIRS. NCCT were evaluated in the magnified bone window and soft tissue window in three axes in a different time by a single radiologist blinded for the measurements of the NCCT other method. Results: Stone largest size (7.92 +/- 3.81 vs. 9.13 +/- 4.08; mm), volume (435.5 +/- 472.7 vs. 683.1 +/- 665.0; mm(3)) and density (989.4 +/- 330.2 vs. 893.0 +/- 324.6; HU) differed between bone and soft-tissue windows, respectively (p<0.0001) 5.2% of the renal units (6/115) were reclassified from residual fragments > 2 mm on soft tissue window to 0-2 mm on bone window. Conclusion: Kidney stone measurements vary according to NCCT window. Measurements in soft tissue window NCCT of stone diameter and volume are larger and stone density is lesser than in bone window. These differences may have impact on clinical decisions.
Palavras-chave
Kidney Calculi, Nephrolithiasis, Patient Outcome Assessment
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/33918
Referências
  1. Alsyouf M, 2014, J ENDOUROL, V28, P704, DOI 10.1089/end.2013.0789
  2. Salido EA, 2013, UROLITHIASIS, V41, P517, DOI 10.1007/s00240-013-0597-0
  3. Bhatt K, 2015, J ENDOUROL, V29, P504, DOI 10.1089/end.2014.0711
  4. Chew B, 2016, J UROLOGY, V195, P982, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2015.11.009
  5. Danilovic A, 2018, J ENDOUROL, V32, P1108, DOI 10.1089/end.2018.0529
  6. Eisner BH, 2009, J UROLOGY, V181, P1710, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2008.11.116
  7. Finch W, 2014, BJU INT, V113, P610, DOI 10.1111/bju.12456
  8. Glazer DI, 2014, AM J ROENTGENOL, V203, P1230, DOI 10.2214/AJR.13.12271
  9. Goldberg H, 2017, WORLD J UROL, V35, P1947, DOI 10.1007/s00345-017-2075-8
  10. Hein S, 2016, WORLD J UROL, V34, P771, DOI 10.1007/s00345-015-1713-2
  11. Ito H, 2015, BJU INT, V115, P446, DOI 10.1111/bju.12775
  12. Ito H, 2012, UROLOGY, V80, P524, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2012.04.001
  13. Jin DH, 2010, RADIOLOGY, V255, P100, DOI 10.1148/radiol.09090583
  14. Kang M, 2016, WORLD J UROL, V34, P1591, DOI 10.1007/s00345-016-1807-5
  15. Kishore TA, 2008, UROLOGY, V72, P761, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2008.05.047
  16. Liden M, 2011, EUR RADIOL, V21, P2218, DOI 10.1007/s00330-011-2171-x
  17. Miller OF, 1999, J UROLOGY, V162, P688, DOI 10.1097/00005392-199909010-00014
  18. Nakada SY, 2000, UROLOGY, V55, P816, DOI 10.1016/S0090-4295(00)00518-5
  19. Narayan VM, 2017, J UROLOGY, V197, P715, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2016.10.066
  20. Niemann T, 2008, AM J ROENTGENOL, V191, P396, DOI 10.2214/AJR.07.3414
  21. Ozimek T, 2018, J ENDOUROL, V32, P597, DOI 10.1089/end.2018.0147
  22. Rippel CA, 2012, J UROLOGY, V188, P2246, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.040
  23. Saw KC, 2000, AM J ROENTGENOL, V175, P329, DOI 10.2214/ajr.175.2.1750329
  24. Shah K, 2010, J ENDOUROL, V24, P1169, DOI 10.1089/end.2010.0124
  25. Sohn W, 2013, UROLOGY, V81, P231, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2012.09.049
  26. Sorokin I, 2016, UROLITHIASIS, V44, P545, DOI 10.1007/s00240-016-0875-8
  27. Spettel S, 2013, UROLOGY, V82, P22, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2013.01.015
  28. Tanrikut C, 2004, UROLOGY, V63, P823, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2003.12.041
  29. Turk C, 2016, EUR UROL, V69, P475, DOI 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.041
  30. Turk C, 2013, GUIDELINES UROLITHIA
  31. Williams JC, 2005, UROL RES, V33, P481, DOI 10.1007/s00240-005-0501-7
  32. Yoshida S, 2007, INT J UROL, V14, P665, DOI 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2007.01767.x
  33. Zilberman DE, 2011, J UROLOGY, V185, P910, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2010.10.052

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MCG
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/InRad
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/55