Patients with renal stones receive multiple computed tomography (CT) examinations. We investigated whether submillisievert (sub-mSv) CT for stone detection could reduce radiation dose at exposure levels comparable to kidney, ureter, and bladder (KUB) radiography.
Purpose
To evaluate the radiation dose exposure, diagnostic performance, and image quality of sub-mSv non-contrast CT using advanced modelled iterative reconstruction algorithm with spectral filtration for the detection of urolithiasis.
Material and Methods
A total of 145 consecutive patients underwent non-contrast CT using a third-generation dual-source scanner to obtain two datasets, i.e. 16.7% (sub-mSv CT, tube detector A) and 100% (standard-dose CT, combination of tube detector A and B) tube loads with spectral filtration. The performance of sub-mSv CT for the detection of stones was analyzed by two readers and compared with that of standard-dose CT. Image quality was measured subjectively and objectively.
Results
In total, 171 stones were detected in 79 patients. The mean effective radiation doses of sub-mSv CT was 0.3 mSv. The sensitivity and specificity values for diagnosis of stones measuring ≥3 mm was 95.1% and 100% for sub-mSv CT. The sensitivity and specificity for all stone detection was 74.9% and 97.8%, respectivey, for sub-mSv CT. The image quality was lower for sub-mSv CT than for standard-dose CT (P < 0.01).
Conclusion
Sub-mSv CT can be achieved with radiation doses close to KUB radiography. Sub-mSv CT with spectral filtration can be used to detect stones measuring ≥3 mm and be used as a follow-up imaging modality as an alternative to KUB radiography.
SorokinIMamoulakisCMiyazawaK, et al.
Epidemiology of stone disease across the world.World J Urol2017;
35:1301–1320.
2.
RomeroVAkpinarHAssimosDG.Kidney stones: a global picture of prevalence, incidence, and associated risk factors.Rev Urol2010;
12:e86–96.
3.
TurkCPetrikASaricaK, et al.
EAU Guidelines on Diagnosis and Conservative Management of Urolithiasis.Eur Urol2016;
69:468–474.
4.
CourseyCACasalinoDDRemerEM, et al.
ACR Appropriateness Criteria(R) acute onset flank pain–suspicion of stone disease.Ultrasound Q2012;
28:227–233.
5.
PearleMSGoldfarbDSAssimosDG, et al.
Medical management of kidney stones: AUA guideline.J Urol2014;
192:316–324.
6.
NiemannTKollmannTBongartzG.Diagnostic performance of low-dose CT for the detection of urolithiasis: a meta-analysis.AJR Am J Roentgenol2008;
191:396–401.
7.
McColloughCHPrimakANBraunN, et al.
Strategies for reducing radiation dose in CT.Radiol Clin North Am2009;
47:27–40.
8.
DewesPFrellesenCScholtzJE, et al.
Low-dose abdominal computed tomography for detection of urinary stone disease - Impact of additional spectral shaping of the X-ray beam on image quality and dose parameters.Eur J Radiol2016;
85:1058–1062.
9.
GlazerDIMaturenKECohanRH, et al.
Assessment of 1 mSv urinary tract stone CT with model-based iterative reconstruction.AJR Am J Roentgenol2014;
203:1230–1235.
10.
HurJParkSBLeeJB, et al.
CT for evaluation of urolithiasis: image quality of ultralow-dose (Sub mSv) CT with knowledge-based iterative reconstruction and diagnostic performance of low-dose CT with statistical iterative reconstruction.Abdom Imaging2015;
40:2432–2440.
11.
ParkSBKimYSLeeJB, et al.
Knowledge-based iterative model reconstruction (IMR) algorithm in ultralow-dose CT for evaluation of urolithiasis: evaluation of radiation dose reduction, image quality, and diagnostic performance.Abdom Imaging2015;
40:3137–3146.
12.
PoolerBDLubnerMGKimDH, et al.
Prospective trial of the detection of urolithiasis on ultralow dose (sub mSv) noncontrast computerized tomography: direct comparison against routine low dose reference standard.J Urol2014;
192:1433–1439.
13.
McLaughlinPDMurphyKPHayesSA, et al.
Non-contrast CT at comparable dose to an abdominal radiograph in patients with acute renal colic; impact of iterative reconstruction on image quality and diagnostic performance.Insights Imaging2014;
5:217–230.
14.
AstrozaGMNeisiusAWangAJ, et al.
Radiation exposure in the follow-up of patients with urolithiasis comparing digital tomosynthesis, non-contrast CT, standard KUB, and IVU.J Endourol2013;
27:1187–1191.
15.
LiuL.Model-based iterative reconstruction: a promising algorithm for today's computed tomography imaging.J Med Imaging Radiat Sci. 2014;
45:131–136.
16.
NuytsJDe ManBFesslerJA, et al.
Modelling the physics in the iterative reconstruction for transmission computed tomography.Phys Med Biol2013;
58:R63–96.
17.
SolomonJMiletoARamirez-GiraldoJC, et al.
Diagnostic Performance of an advanced modeled iterative reconstruction algorithm for low-contrast detectability with a third-generation dual-source multidetector CT scanner: potential for radiation dose reduction in a multireader study.Radiology2015;
275:735–745.
18.
RemerEMHertsBRPrimakA, et al.
Detection of urolithiasis: comparison of 100% tube exposure images reconstructed with filtered back projection and 50% tube exposure images reconstructed with sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction.Radiology2014;
272:749–756.
19.
den HarderAMWilleminkMJvan DoormaalPJ, et al.
Radiation dose reduction for CT assessment of urolithiasis using iterative reconstruction: A prospective intra-individual study.Eur Radiol2018;
28:143–150.
20.
Lee KH, Shim YS, Park SH et al. Comparison of standard-dose and half-dose dual-source abdominopelvic CT scans for evaluation of acute abdominal pain. Acta Radiol 2019;60:946–954.
21.
Lee SJ, Park SH, Kim AY, et al. A prospective comparison of standard-dose CT enterography and 50% reduced-dose CT enterography with and without noise reduction for evaluating Crohn disease. Am J Roentgenol 2011;197:50–57.
22.
KatariaBAlthenJNSmedbyO, et al.
Assessment of image quality in abdominal CT: potential dose reduction with model-based iterative reconstruction.Eur Radiol2018;
28:2464–2473.
23.
KulkarniNMUppotRNEisnerBH, et al.
Radiation dose reduction at multidetector CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction for evaluation of urolithiasis: how low can we go?Radiology2012;
265:158–166.
24.
BotsikasDStefanelliSBoudabbousS, et al.
Model-based iterative reconstruction versus adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction in low-dose abdominal CT for urolithiasis.AJR Am J Roentgenol2014;
203:336–340.
25.
TenantSPangCLDissanayakeP, et al.
Intra-patient comparison of reduced-dose model-based iterative reconstruction with standard-dose adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction in the CT diagnosis and follow-up of urolithiasis.Eur Radiol2017;
27:4163–4172.
26.
PolettiPAPlatonARutschmannOT, et al.
Low-dose versus standard-dose CT protocol in patients with clinically suspected renal colic.AJR Am J Roentgenol2007;
188:927–933.
27.
ValentinJ.The 2007 recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection.
Oxford:
Elsevier, 2007.
28.
GooHW.CT radiation dose optimization and estimation: an update for radiologists.Korean J Radiol2012;
13:1–11.
29.
Report of AAPM Task Group 204. Size specific dose estimates (SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations.
College Park, MD:
American Association of Physicists in Medicine; 2011. Available at: https://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/rpt_204.pdf (accessed 22 February 2019).
30.
MettlerFAJrHudaWYoshizumiTT, et al.
Effective doses in radiology and diagnostic nuclear medicine: a catalog.Radiology2008;
248:254–263.
31.
EgeGAkmanHKuzucuK, et al.
Can computed tomography scout radiography replace plain film in the evaluation of patients with acute urinary tract colic?Acta Radiol2004:
45:469–473.
32.
AssiZPlattJFFrancisIR, et al.
Sensitivity of CT scout radiography and abdominal radiography for revealing ureteral calculi on helical CT: implications for radiologic follow-up.AJR Am J Roentgenol2000;
175:333–337.
33.
JackmanSVPotterSRReganF, et al.
Plain abdominal x-ray versus computerized tomography screening: sensitivity for stone localization after nonenhanced spiral computerized tomography.J Urol2000;
164:308–310.
34.
LeyendeckerPFaucherVLabaniA, et al.
Prospective evaluation of ultra-low-dose contrast-enhanced 100-kV abdominal computed tomography with tin filter: effect on radiation dose reduction and image quality with a third-generation dual-source CT system.Eur Radiol2019;
29:2107–2116.
35.
MesserliMKluckertTKnitelM, et al.
Ultralow dose CT for pulmonary nodule detection with chest x-ray equivalent dose - a prospective intra-individual comparative study.Eur Radiol2017;
27:3290–3299.
36.
SuntharalingamSMikatCWetterA, et al.
Whole-body ultra-low dose CT using spectral shaping for detection of osteolytic lesion in multiple myeloma.Eur Radiol2018;
28:2273–2280.
37.
ZhangGMShiBSunH, et al.
High-pitch low-dose abdominopelvic CT with tin-filtration technique for detecting urinary stones.Abdom Radiol2017;
42:2127–2134.
38.
FurlanAFederleMPYealyDM, et al.
Nonobstructing renal stones on unenhanced CT: a real cause for renal colic?AJR Am J Roentgenol2008;
190:W125–127.
39.
JuraYHLaheySEisnerBH, et al.
Ureteroscopic treatment of patients with small, painful, non-obstructing renal stones: the small stone syndrome.Clin Nephrol2013;
79:45–49.
40.
CollDMVaranelliMJSmithRC.Relationship of spontaneous passage of ureteral calculi to stone size and location as revealed by unenhanced helical CT.AJR Am J Roentgenol2002;
178:101–103.
41.
LukasiewiczA.Bhargavan-ChatfieldMCoombsL, et al.
Radiation dose index of renal colic protocol CT studies in the United States: A report from the American College of Radiology National Radiology Data Registry.Radiology2014;
271:445–451.
42.
WeisenthalKKarthikPShawM, et al.
Evaluation of kidney stones with reduced–radiation dose CT: progress from 2011−2012 to 2015−2016—not there yet.Radiology2017;
286:581–589.
43.
KimHJLeeKHKimMJ, et. al.
for LOCAT Group. Using 2-mSv Appendiceal CT in Usual Practice for Adolescents and Young Adults: Willingness Survey of 579 Radiologists, Emergency Physicians, and Surgeons from 20 Hospitals.Korean J Radiol2019;
20:e83.
44.
MooreCLDanielsBSinghD, et al.
A. Prevalence and clinical importance of alternative causes of symptoms using a renal colic computed tomography protocol in patients with flank or back pain and absence of pyuria.Acad Emerg Med2013;
20:470–478.
45.
SamimMGossSLutyS, et al.
Incidental Findings on CT for Suspected Renal Colic in Emergency Department Patients: Prevalence and Types in 5,383 Consecutive Examinations.J Am Coll Radiol2015;
12:63–69.
