Editorial Comment on: Automated Computer Software Compared with Manual Measurements for CT-Based Urinary Stone Metrics: An Evaluation Study by Bell et al.
Restricted accessEditorialFirst published online May, 2018
Editorial Comment on: Automated Computer Software Compared with Manual Measurements for CT-Based Urinary Stone Metrics: An Evaluation Study by Bell et al.
BellJR, PosielskiNM, PennistonKL, et al.Automated computer software compared with manual measurements for CT based urinary stone metrics: An evaluation study. J Endourol, 2018; 32:455–461.
2.
SmithRC, VergaM, McCarthyS, et al.Diagnosis of acute flank pain: Value of unenhanced helical CT. Am J Roentgenol, 1996; 166:97–101.
3.
PatelSR, NakadaSY. Quantification of preoperative Stone burden for ureteroscopy and shock wave lithotripsy: Current state and future recommendations. Urology, 2011; 78:282–285.
4.
Coursey MorenoC, BelandMD, GoldfarbS, HarvinHJ. American College of Radiology ACR Appropriateness Criteria. 2015. Available at: https://acsearch.acr.org/docs/69362/Narrative (accessed on August3, 2018).
5.
KadihasanogluM, MarienT, MillerNL. Ureteral stone diameter on computerized tomography coronal reconstructions is clinically important and under-reported. Urology, 2017; 102:54–60.
6.
NasserFS, RitsemaDF, CheneyS, et al.Reviewing radiographic images with patients: Results of a trial on patient preferences, understanding, and satisfaction. J Endourol, 2010; 24:2083–2091.
7.
TzouDT, IsaacsonD, UsawachintachitM, et al.Variation in radiologic and urologic computed tomography interpretation of urinary tract stone burden: Results from the registry for stones of the kidney and ureter. Urology, 2018; 111:59–64.
8.
ConnollySS, YounisC, MeadeW, et al.Can computed tomography in the protocol for renal colic be interpreted by urologists?. BJU Int, 2004; 94:1332–1335.
