A prospective, matched comparison of ultra-low and standard-dose computed tomography for assessment of renal colic.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultra-low-dose computed tomography (ULDCT) compared with standard-dose CT (SDCT) in the evaluation of patients with clinically suspected renal colic, in addition to secondary features (hydroureteronephrosis, perinephric stranding) and additional pathological entities (renal masses). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective, comparative cohort study was conducted amongst patients presenting to the emergency department with signs and symptoms suggestive of renal or ureteric colic. Patients underwent both SDCT and ULDCT. Single-blinded review of the image sets was performed independently by three board-certified radiologists. RESULTS: Among 21 patients, the effective radiation dose was lower for ULDCT [mean (SD) 1.02 (0.16) mSv] than SDCT [mean (SD) 4.97 (2.02) mSv]. Renal and/or ureteric calculi were detected in 57.1% (12/21) of patients. There were no significant differences in calculus detection and size estimation between ULDCT and SDCT. A higher concordance was observed for ureteric calculi (75%) than renal calculi (38%), mostly due to greater detection of calculi of <3 mm by SDCT. Clinically significant calculi (≥3 mm) were detected by ULDCT with high specificity (97.6%) and sensitivity (100%) compared to overall detection (specificity 91.2%, sensitivity 58.8%). ULDCT and SDCT were highly concordant for detection of secondary features, while ULDCT detected less renal cysts of <2 cm. Inter-observer agreement for the ureteric calculi detection was 93.9% for SDCT and 87.8% for ULDCT. CONCLUSION: ULDCT performed similarly to SDCT for calculus detection and size estimation with reduced radiation exposure. Based on this and other studies, ULDCT should be considered as the first-line modality for evaluation of renal colic in routine practice.

Single use versus reusable digital flexible ureteroscopes: A prospective comparative study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the performance and surgical outcomes of two different single-use digital flexible ureteroscopes with a reusable video flexible ureteroscope. METHODS: Patients undergoing retrograde flexible ureteroscopy at Nepean Hospital, Sydney, Australia, were included in this study. Three different flexible ureteroscopes were used in this study: (i) single-use digital LithoVue (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA); (ii) single-use digital PU3022A (Pusen, Zhuhai, China); and (iii) reusable digital URF-V2 (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). Visibility and maneuverability was rated on a 5-point Likert scale by the operating surgeon. Operative outcomes and complications were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients were included in the present study. Of these, 141 patients had ureteroscopy for stone treatment, four for endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery and five for diagnostic/tumor treatment. There were 55 patients in the LithoVue group, 31 in the PU3022A group and 64 patients in the Olympus URF-V2 group. The URF-V2 group had higher visibility scores than both the single-use scopes and higher maneuverability scores when compared with the PU3022A. The LithoVue had higher visibility and maneuverability scores when compared with the PU3022A. There were no differences in operative time, rates of relook flexible ureteroscopes, scope failure or complication rates observed. CONCLUSIONS: Single-use digital flexible ureteroscopes have visibility and maneuverability profiles approaching that of a reusable digital flexible ureteroscope. Single-use flexible ureteroscopes achieve similar clinical outcomes to the more expensive reusable versions.

EURADOS intercomparison on emergency radiobioassay.

Nine laboratories participated in an intercomparison exercise organised by the European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS) for emergency radiobioassay involving four high-risk radionuclides ((239)Pu, (241)Am, (90)Sr and (226)Ra). Diverse methods of analysis were used by the participating laboratories for the in vitro determination of each of the four radionuclides in urine samples. Almost all the methods used are sensitive enough to meet the requirements for emergency radiobioassay derived for this project in reference to the Clinical Decision Guide introduced by the NCRP. Results from most of the methods meet the requirements of ISO 28218 on accuracy in terms of relative bias and relative precision. However, some technical gaps have been identified. For example, some laboratories do not have the ability to assay samples containing (226)Ra, and sample turnaround time would be expected to be much shorter than that reported by many laboratories, as timely results for internal contamination and early decisions on medical intervention are highly desired. Participating laboratories are expected to learn from each other on the methods used to improve the interoperability among these laboratories.

International workshop on emergency radiobioassay: considerations, gaps and recommendations.

An international workshop on emergency radiobioassay was held in Ottawa, Canada, 1-3 September 2010. Sixty-five scientists and public health officials from five countries attended the workshop and gave 36 presentations. During the workshop, many considerations were raised, gaps identified, and recommendations given for emergency radiobioassay for both preparedness and response in case of a radiological or nuclear incident. In short, some bioassay methods and protocols need to be developed, validated, and exercised; national and international radiobioassay laboratory networks should be established; and communications and collaborations among public health officials, monitoring experts, and medical staff are encouraged. All these activities are required to make us better prepared for an RN emergency.