[Imaging of the urinary tract in adults. A guideline for general practice]. / Bildediagnostikk av urinveiene hos voksne. En rettledning for allmennpraksis.

This article discusses the indications for imaging of the urinary tract from the general practitioners' point of view. Urography should be used in the control of patients with previous attacks of ureteral colic, in patients presenting macroscopic hematuria and as a preoperative investigation prior to extracorporal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). Ultrasound should be chosen in patients with microscopic hematuria and non-specific abdominal pain. Computed tomography should be used in cases with non-specific findings using urography and ultrasound. There are no indications for imaging in women with recurrent urinary tract infection, in men with benign prostatic hypertrophy and in the evaluation of hypertension.

Intravenous urography versus ultrasonography in evaluation of women with recurrent urinary tract infection.

Intravenous urography and ultrasonography were compared prospectively in 120 women with recurrent urinary tract infection. The median age was 44 years (range 15-85). There was good correlation between the two methods in detecting hydronephrosis, calculi greater than or equal to 5 mm, and major post-pyelonephritic scarring. Urography was superior in detecting small cortical scars, slight caliceal dilatation, and less than or equal to 4 mm calculi. Based on the good results, low cost, and absence of radiation hazards or contrast media reactions, we conclude that ultrasonography may replace urography when a radiological screening of the upper urinary tract is deemed necessary in women with recurrent urinary tract infection.

The changing scene of radiology: value of urography as initial examination in infectious and hypertensive disease, hematuria and malignant disease.

Four to 20% positive findings were found in a review of 1913 excretory urographics. Possibly relevant findings were 20% in patients referred for infectious disease, 10% in hypertensive disease, 6% in hematuria and 4% in neoplasms. Urography influenced treatment mainly in the 2 groups with few positive findings. The costs for positive findings may be acceptable in patients with hematuria or suspicion of neoplasms, but are too high in the other groups. Until ultrasonography can replace intravenous urography as the first screening method in upper urinary tract disease, the patient selection for urography in infectious and hypertensive disease should be improved.

Ultrasonography versus excretory urography: value in urological disease.

Considerable savings in cost and some reduction in gonad dose and contrast medium allergy can be expected if excretory urography can be replaced by real-time ultrasonography as the first examination in upper urinary tract disease. For one year, all patients referred for excretory urography (UG) are first examined with real-time ultrasonography (US) to establish whether UG can be completely replaced by US, or the indications for which US should be the first examination of choice. The results in 200 consecutive patients indicate that both methods sometimes fail, but not in the same patients. A combination of the two may be unbeatable, but uneconomical. The results obtained over one year may give the answer. Hopefully studies at other centres will be initiated to increase the size of the case material.

Calculation of internal costs in a department of diagnostic radiology.

Even though high technology accounts for less than 1% of health care costs in industrialized countries, radiology is often blamed for their escalation. In a squeezed health care economy it is important to know the real cost of diagnostic radiological procedures in order to set priorities and realistic budgets, and to bill (actually or fictively) referring departments, physician's patients, insurance companies etc., and to demonstrate real costs of radiology for politicians and clinicians. The so-called Radiology Points used in the Nordic countries are in our opinion not adequate as basis for "price tags", even if to some extent they do reflect work and expenses involved in an examination. The real costs of ultrasonography (US) and excretory urography (UG) of the upper urinary tract have been compared in a study being performed to determine whether US can replace UG as the first examination in upper urinary tract disease. The cost of US is 53% (high osmolar contrast media) or 27% (anionic contrast media) of UG. If US can replace UG as the first examination in upper urinary tract disease the cost savings will be dramatic, especially if low osmolar or anionic contrast media are routinely used.