Detection of renal stones on portal venous phase CT: Comparison of thin axial and coronal maximumintensity-projection images

Michael T Corwin, Justin S. Lee, Ghaneh Fananapazir, MacHelle Wilson, Ramit Lamba

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective. The objective of our study was to determine the sensitivity of thin axial and coronal maximum-intensity-projection (MIP) images for the detection of renal stones on contrast-enhanced CT performed in the portal venous phase. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This retrospective study included 72 patients, 59 of whom had at least one renal stone, who underwent unenhanced CT immediately followed by contrast-enhanced CT in the portal venous phase. Two abdominal imaging fellowship-trained radiologists independently recorded the number of stones on both thin (1-1.50 mm) axial and 5-mm coronal MIP images in the portal venous phase. The reference standard was determined by consensus review of the thin axial unenhanced images. Reviewer sensitivity was calculated and categorized by stone diameter. RESULTS. One hundred forty-eight stones were present; the mean number of stones per patient was 2.5 (SD, 2.7). The mean stone size was 2.5 mm (SD, 2.7). The sensitivity of thin axial images was 89.9%, 99.0%, and 100.0% for reviewer 1 and 83.1%, 98.0%, and 100.0% for reviewer 2 for all stones, stones ≥ 2 mm, and stones ≥ 3 mm, respectively. The sensitivity of coronal MIP images was 86.5%, 96.2%, and 100.0% for reviewer 1 and 79.0%, 91.4%, and 96.6% for reviewer 2 for all stones, stones ≥ 2 mm, and stones ≥ 3 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION. Thin axial images are highly sensitive for the detection of renal stones ≥ 2 mm on portal venous phase CT. Coronal MIP images do not improve renal stone detection over thin axial images.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1200-1204
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Roentgenology
Volume207
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2016

Fingerprint

Kidney
Retrospective Studies
Radiologists

Keywords

  • Contrast material
  • CT
  • Nephrolithiasis
  • Portal venous phase
  • Renal stone

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

@article{4bcf2b43e7f14a61bdc471a8b785dc12,
title = "Detection of renal stones on portal venous phase CT: Comparison of thin axial and coronal maximumintensity-projection images",
abstract = "Objective. The objective of our study was to determine the sensitivity of thin axial and coronal maximum-intensity-projection (MIP) images for the detection of renal stones on contrast-enhanced CT performed in the portal venous phase. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This retrospective study included 72 patients, 59 of whom had at least one renal stone, who underwent unenhanced CT immediately followed by contrast-enhanced CT in the portal venous phase. Two abdominal imaging fellowship-trained radiologists independently recorded the number of stones on both thin (1-1.50 mm) axial and 5-mm coronal MIP images in the portal venous phase. The reference standard was determined by consensus review of the thin axial unenhanced images. Reviewer sensitivity was calculated and categorized by stone diameter. RESULTS. One hundred forty-eight stones were present; the mean number of stones per patient was 2.5 (SD, 2.7). The mean stone size was 2.5 mm (SD, 2.7). The sensitivity of thin axial images was 89.9{\%}, 99.0{\%}, and 100.0{\%} for reviewer 1 and 83.1{\%}, 98.0{\%}, and 100.0{\%} for reviewer 2 for all stones, stones ≥ 2 mm, and stones ≥ 3 mm, respectively. The sensitivity of coronal MIP images was 86.5{\%}, 96.2{\%}, and 100.0{\%} for reviewer 1 and 79.0{\%}, 91.4{\%}, and 96.6{\%} for reviewer 2 for all stones, stones ≥ 2 mm, and stones ≥ 3 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION. Thin axial images are highly sensitive for the detection of renal stones ≥ 2 mm on portal venous phase CT. Coronal MIP images do not improve renal stone detection over thin axial images.",
keywords = "Contrast material, CT, Nephrolithiasis, Portal venous phase, Renal stone",
author = "Corwin, {Michael T} and Lee, {Justin S.} and Ghaneh Fananapazir and MacHelle Wilson and Ramit Lamba",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2214/AJR.16.16099",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "207",
pages = "1200--1204",
journal = "American Journal of Roentgenology",
issn = "0361-803X",
publisher = "American Roentgen Ray Society",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Detection of renal stones on portal venous phase CT

T2 - Comparison of thin axial and coronal maximumintensity-projection images

AU - Corwin, Michael T

AU - Lee, Justin S.

AU - Fananapazir, Ghaneh

AU - Wilson, MacHelle

AU - Lamba, Ramit

PY - 2016/12/1

Y1 - 2016/12/1

N2 - Objective. The objective of our study was to determine the sensitivity of thin axial and coronal maximum-intensity-projection (MIP) images for the detection of renal stones on contrast-enhanced CT performed in the portal venous phase. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This retrospective study included 72 patients, 59 of whom had at least one renal stone, who underwent unenhanced CT immediately followed by contrast-enhanced CT in the portal venous phase. Two abdominal imaging fellowship-trained radiologists independently recorded the number of stones on both thin (1-1.50 mm) axial and 5-mm coronal MIP images in the portal venous phase. The reference standard was determined by consensus review of the thin axial unenhanced images. Reviewer sensitivity was calculated and categorized by stone diameter. RESULTS. One hundred forty-eight stones were present; the mean number of stones per patient was 2.5 (SD, 2.7). The mean stone size was 2.5 mm (SD, 2.7). The sensitivity of thin axial images was 89.9%, 99.0%, and 100.0% for reviewer 1 and 83.1%, 98.0%, and 100.0% for reviewer 2 for all stones, stones ≥ 2 mm, and stones ≥ 3 mm, respectively. The sensitivity of coronal MIP images was 86.5%, 96.2%, and 100.0% for reviewer 1 and 79.0%, 91.4%, and 96.6% for reviewer 2 for all stones, stones ≥ 2 mm, and stones ≥ 3 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION. Thin axial images are highly sensitive for the detection of renal stones ≥ 2 mm on portal venous phase CT. Coronal MIP images do not improve renal stone detection over thin axial images.

AB - Objective. The objective of our study was to determine the sensitivity of thin axial and coronal maximum-intensity-projection (MIP) images for the detection of renal stones on contrast-enhanced CT performed in the portal venous phase. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This retrospective study included 72 patients, 59 of whom had at least one renal stone, who underwent unenhanced CT immediately followed by contrast-enhanced CT in the portal venous phase. Two abdominal imaging fellowship-trained radiologists independently recorded the number of stones on both thin (1-1.50 mm) axial and 5-mm coronal MIP images in the portal venous phase. The reference standard was determined by consensus review of the thin axial unenhanced images. Reviewer sensitivity was calculated and categorized by stone diameter. RESULTS. One hundred forty-eight stones were present; the mean number of stones per patient was 2.5 (SD, 2.7). The mean stone size was 2.5 mm (SD, 2.7). The sensitivity of thin axial images was 89.9%, 99.0%, and 100.0% for reviewer 1 and 83.1%, 98.0%, and 100.0% for reviewer 2 for all stones, stones ≥ 2 mm, and stones ≥ 3 mm, respectively. The sensitivity of coronal MIP images was 86.5%, 96.2%, and 100.0% for reviewer 1 and 79.0%, 91.4%, and 96.6% for reviewer 2 for all stones, stones ≥ 2 mm, and stones ≥ 3 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION. Thin axial images are highly sensitive for the detection of renal stones ≥ 2 mm on portal venous phase CT. Coronal MIP images do not improve renal stone detection over thin axial images.

KW - Contrast material

KW - CT

KW - Nephrolithiasis

KW - Portal venous phase

KW - Renal stone

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84999233000&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84999233000&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2214/AJR.16.16099

DO - 10.2214/AJR.16.16099

M3 - Article

C2 - 27611106

AN - SCOPUS:84999233000

VL - 207

SP - 1200

EP - 1204

JO - American Journal of Roentgenology

JF - American Journal of Roentgenology

SN - 0361-803X

IS - 6

ER -