2047 INTERPRETATION OF URETHRAL IMAGING BY UROLOGY AND RADIOLOGY RESIDENTS

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyImaging/Radiology: Uroradiology I1 Apr 20122047 INTERPRETATION OF URETHRAL IMAGING BY UROLOGY AND RADIOLOGY RESIDENTS Lucas Wiegand, Cary Siegel, and Steven Brandes Lucas WiegandLucas Wiegand St. Louis, MO More articles by this author , Cary SiegelCary Siegel St. Louis, MO More articles by this author , and Steven BrandesSteven Brandes St. Louis, MO More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.2211AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Interpretation of imaging for urethral stricture disease is a highly specified skill practiced routinely only by reconstructive Urologists and Radiologists with genitourinary subspecialty training. As few practitioners routinely perform retrograde urethrograms (RUG) and voiding cystourethrograms (VCUG), resident exposure to such imaging is limited. METHODS A standardized imaging “quiz” consisting of 10 RUG/VCUG combinations was administered to 11 Urology and 15 Radiology residents from all levels of training at ACGME-accredited residency programs. The residents were asked to assess for urethral stenoses and their lengths, if present. They were also asked to grade the quality of the imaging and proper positioning of the patients. Data were analyzed by Chi-square analysis. RESULTS 26 residents took the quiz, 15 Radiology, 11 Urology. Average year of training was 3.64 for Urology and 2.87 for Radiology (p=0.06). Overall accuracy (correctly identifying the location of the stricture and no false positives) was 29% for Radiology and 43% for Urology (p<0.05). Not counting false positives, stricture location was accurately identified by 34% in Radiology and 52% in Urology (p<0.05). A normal RUG was recognized by 100% of Urologists and 80% of Radiologists (p=0.11). Anterior strictures were identified by 35% in Radiology and 52% in Urology (p<0.05). A posterior stricture was identified by 47% of Radiologists and 55% of Urologists (p=0.69). Posterior strictures were falsely reported by 10.4% of Radiologists and 3.5% of Urologists (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS Resident interpretation skills of urethrography for stricture disease are poor. Radiology residents were less accurate and more likely to falsely identify normal urethras as strictured. More didactic teaching of urethrography needs to be given to residents. A formal educational program for RUG/VCUG interpretation should be designed and implemented in Urology and Radiology resident education. © 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 187Issue 4SApril 2012Page: e826 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Lucas Wiegand St. Louis, MO More articles by this author Cary Siegel St. Louis, MO More articles by this author Steven Brandes St. Louis, MO More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF DownloadLoading ...