PD36-02 DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCE OF LOW-DOSE NON ENHANCE CT WITH ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION IN DIAGNOSIS OF UROLITHIASIS

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyStone Disease: New Technology I1 Apr 2014PD36-02 DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCE OF LOW-DOSE NON ENHANCE CT WITH ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION IN DIAGNOSIS OF UROLITHIASIS Jung Won Choe, Kyung Do Kim, Young Tae Moon, Jong Kyou Kwon, In Ho Chang, Jung Hoon Kim, Jae Duck Choi, Seung Hyun Ahn, Min Su Kim, So Yeon Lee, Jae Hyung Ryu, and Sang Ho Park Jung Won ChoeJung Won Choe More articles by this author , Kyung Do KimKyung Do Kim More articles by this author , Young Tae MoonYoung Tae Moon More articles by this author , Jong Kyou KwonJong Kyou Kwon More articles by this author , In Ho ChangIn Ho Chang More articles by this author , Jung Hoon KimJung Hoon Kim More articles by this author , Jae Duck ChoiJae Duck Choi More articles by this author , Seung Hyun AhnSeung Hyun Ahn More articles by this author , Min Su KimMin Su Kim More articles by this author , So Yeon LeeSo Yeon Lee More articles by this author , Jae Hyung RyuJae Hyung Ryu More articles by this author , and Sang Ho ParkSang Ho Park More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.2439AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Low-dose CT(LDCT) is a promising option for diagnosing urinary stones, but it can substantially increase image noise. We evaluated the efficacy of iterative reconstruction(IR) technique for reducing image noises on LDCT and the diagnostic performances especially in urologic perspective. METHODS 197 stones from 119 patients who performed non-enhanced CT with both standard dose and LDCT with IR(LDCT-IR) were enrolled. Interpretations were performed in the two scans for stone characteristics(size, volume, location, house field unit(HU), skin-to-stone distance(SSD)), radiation(dose-length product(DLP), effective dose(ED)), image noise(objective, subjective). Inter-observer agreements were assessed between urologist and radiologist with kappa analysis. All comparisons were performed after dividing all stones into 3 groups; all size, larger than 3mm and less than 3mm. RESULTS No statistical differences were found in stone characteristics between the two scans except HU in all size group. The average DLP and ED were 394.94mGy and 5.92mSv in CCT, and 92.88mGy and 1.39mSv in LDCT-IR, respectively. The average dose reduction was 76.6%(p<0.001). In the LDCT-IR, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy for the urologist and radiologist reviewer have no significant differences for diagnosing stones of larger than 3 mm (p >0.05). Inter-observer agreement of LDCT-IR between the two reviewers was high with kappa values ranging from 0.901 to 1.000 in all groups. Objective image noise was higher on LDCT-IR (p<0.01), but no significant differences of subjective noise was found. CONCLUSIONS LDCT-IR showed significant radiation reduction while maintaining image quality as an attractive option in urologic perspective to diagnosis of urinary stones. © 2014FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 191Issue 4SApril 2014Page: e902 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2014MetricsAuthor Information Jung Won Choe More articles by this author Kyung Do Kim More articles by this author Young Tae Moon More articles by this author Jong Kyou Kwon More articles by this author In Ho Chang More articles by this author Jung Hoon Kim More articles by this author Jae Duck Choi More articles by this author Seung Hyun Ahn More articles by this author Min Su Kim More articles by this author So Yeon Lee More articles by this author Jae Hyung Ryu More articles by this author Sang Ho Park More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...