Computed tomography versus intravenous urography in diagnosis of acute flank pain from urolithiasis: a randomized study comparing imaging costs and radiation dose.

Abstract

The equivalent sensitivity of non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) and intravenous urography (IVU) in the diagnosis of suspected ureteric colic has been established. Approximately 50% of patients with suspected ureteric colic do not have a nephro-urological cause for pain. Because many such patients require further imaging studies, NCCT may obviate the need for these studies and, in so doing, be more cost effective and involve less overall radiation exposure. The present study compares the total imaging cost and radiation dose of NCCT versus IVU in the diagnosis of acute flank pain. Two hundred and twenty-four patients (157 men; mean age 45 years; age range 19-79 years) with suspected renal colic were randomized either to NCCT or IVU. The number of additional diagnostic imaging studies, cost (IVU A$136; CTU A$173), radiation exposure and imaging times were compared. Of 119 (53%) patients with renal obstruction, 105 had no nephro-urological causes of pain. For 21 (20%) of these patients an alternative diagnosis was made at the initial imaging, 10 of which were significant. Of 118 IVU patients, 28 (24%) required 32 additional imaging tests to reach a diagnosis, whereas seven of 106 (6%) NCCT patients required seven additional imaging studies. The average total diagnostic imaging cost for the NCCT group was A$181.94 and A$175.46 for the IVU group (P < 0.43). Mean radiation dose to diagnosis was 5.00 mSv (NCCT) versus 3.50 mSv (IVU) (P < 0.001). Mean imaging time was 30 min (NCCT) versus 75 min (IVU) (P < 0.001). Diagnostic imaging costs were remarkably similar. Although NCCT involves a higher radiation dose than IVU, its advantages of faster diagnosis, the avoidance of additional diagnostic imaging tests and its ability to diagnose other causes makes it the study of choice for acute flank pain at Christchurch Hospital.