Point-of-care ultrasound associated with shorter length of stay than computed tomography for renal colic.

BACKGROUND: Despite similar diagnostic effectiveness for renal colic, computed tomography (CT) is more resource intensive than point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS). We sought to compare Emergency Department (ED) length of stay (LOS) among patients with renal colic according to imaging modality utilized. We secondarily compared rates of infection, return ED visits, missed significant pathology, and urologic intervention. METHODS: This was a 12-month (1/1/22-12/31/22) multi-site retrospective cohort study of all patients diagnosed with renal colic who presented to the ED on days when at least one patient had a billable renal PoCUS examination performed. Patients with a history of genitourinary malignancy, pregnancy, renal transplant, hemodialysis, single kidney, prior visit for renal colic in the previous 30 days, or an incomplete workup were excluded. Median ED LOS was compared using a Wilcoxon rank sum test, and the 95% confidence limits for the difference between medians was calculated. Secondary outcomes were compared using a Fisher's Exact test. RESULTS: Of 415 patients screened, 325 were included for analysis: 150 had CT alone, 80 had PoCUS alone, 54 had PoCUS plus CT, and 41 had neither. Median LOS for PoCUS alone was 75.0 (95% CI 39.3-110.7) minutes shorter than CT alone (231.5 vs. 307.0 min, p < 0.0001). Similar rates of infection, return visits, and missed pathology occurred across all groups (p > 0.10). Urologic interventions were higher in the PoCUS plus CT (25.9%) group compared to CT alone (7.3%), PoCUS alone (2.5%), and neither (7.3%), p < 0.0001. CONCLUSION: Among patients with renal colic, PoCUS was associated with shorter ED LOS compared to CT, without differences in infection rates, return visits, or missed pathology. Patients with PoCUS plus CT had a higher rate of urologic interventions, suggesting PoCUS may have a role in identifying patients who would most benefit from CT.

Renal point-of-care ultrasound performed by ED staff with limited training and 30-day outcomes in patients with renal colic.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Emergency Department (ED) renal point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) in renal colic by accredited specialists has good prognostic value. This may not be generalizable to under-resourced EDs. We investigated PoCUS in renal colic in our ED with lesser training. METHODS: We performed a single-centre health records review of adult ED patients with renal colic and PoCUS. Patients were managed by a non-ED specialist/resident doctor with no POCUS accreditation in consultation with an attending. These doctors attended a 3.5-h training session conducted by accredited attendings to examine hydronephrosis. They needed to verify their PoCUS findings with an attending during the first two weeks of their six-month posting before performing it independently. The primary outcome was 30-day urological procedures in hydronephrotic vs. non-hydronephrotic groups. Secondary outcomes were the distribution of primary outcome with grades of hydronephrosis, 30-day ED nephrolithiasis-related reattendances in hydronephrotic vs. non-hydronephrotic groups and its distribution with grades of hydronephrosis. We compared outcomes using Fisher's exact test. We also reported crude odds ratio (COR) and 95% CI of primary outcome between hydronephrotic vs. non-hydronephrotic groups. p values ≤ 0.05 were significant. RESULTS: We recruited 651 patients; 160 (24.6%) without and 491 (75.4%) with hydronephrosis. Rates of grades of hydronephrosis were: mild (76.6%), moderate (13.8%), severe (1.2%) and undifferentiated (8.4%). There was a difference in 30-day urological procedures (rates [95% CI]) in hydronephrotic vs. non-hydronephrotic groups, 11.2 [8.7-14.0]% vs. 2.5 [1.0-6.3]%; p < 0.001; COR (95% CI) 4.9 (1.8-13.8); p = 0.002. Increasing 30-day urological procedural rates were associated with increasing grade of hydronephrosis [no: 2.5%, mild: 7.7%, moderate: 23.5%, severe: 67.0% and undifferentiated: 14.6%; p < 0.001]. No differences occurred in other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Renal PoCUS could be performed by non-ED specialist/resident doctors to identify patients without hydronephrosis who rarely required urological intervention. Hydronephrotic patients could benefit from further risk stratification.

ABSTRAIT: CONTEXTE ET OBJECTIF: L'échographie rénale au point de soin (PoCUS) dans les coliques rénales par des spécialistes agréés a une bonne valeur pronostique. Cela peut ne pas être généralisable aux SU sous-financés. Nous avons étudié PoCUS dans les coliques rénales dans notre DE avec une formation moindre. MéTHODES: Nous avons effectué un examen des dossiers médicaux d'un seul centre des patients adultes atteints de coliques rénales et de PoCUS. Les patients étaient pris en charge par un médecin résident/spécialiste non-membre de la DG sans accréditation POCUS en consultation avec un médecin traitant. Ces médecins ont assisté à une séance de formation de 3,5 heures menée par des titulaires accrédités pour examiner l'hydronéphrose. Ils devaient vérifier leurs résultats PoCUS auprès d'un assistant pendant les deux premières semaines de leur affectation de six mois avant de l'effectuer de manière indépendante. Le critère de jugement principal était des procédures urologiques de 30 jours dans les groupes hydronéphrotiques vs non-hydronephrotiques. Les critères de jugement secondaires étaient la distribution du critère de jugement primaire avec les grades d'hydronéphrose, les reattendances liées à la néphrose ED de 30 jours dans les groupes hydronéphrotiques vs non hydronéphrotiques et sa distribution avec les grades d'hydronéphrose. Nous avons comparé les résultats en utilisant le test exact de Fisher. Nous avons également signalé un rapport de cotes brut (RC) et un IC à 95 % du critère de jugement principal entre les groupes hydronéphrotiques et non hydronéphrotiques. Les valeurs de P 0,05 étaient significatives. RéSULTATS: Nous avons recruté 651 patients; 160 (24,6%) sans et 491 (75,4%) avec hydronéphrose. Les taux d'hydronéphrose étaient les suivants : légère (76,6 %), modérée (13,8 %), sévère (1,2 %) et indifférenciée (8,4 %). Il y avait une différence dans les interventions urologiques de 30 jours (taux [IC à 95 %]) dans les groupes hydronéphrotiques par rapport aux groupes non-hydronephrotiques, 11,2 [8,7-14,0] % contre 2,5 [1,0-6,3]%; p < 0,001; RCC (IC à 95 %) 4,9 (1,8-13,8); p = 0,002. L'augmentation des taux de procédures urologiques de 30 jours était associée à l'augmentation du grade d'hydronéphrose [non : 2,5%, léger : 7,7%, modéré : 23,5%, sévère : 67,0% et indifférencié : 14,6%; p < 0,001]. Aucune différence n'est survenue dans les autres critères de jugement secondaires. CONCLUSIONS: La PoCUS rénale pourrait être réalisée par des médecins non spécialistes/résidents de la D pour identifier les patients sans hydronéphrose qui ont rarement nécessité une intervention urologique. Les patients hydronéphrotiques pourraient bénéficier d'une meilleure stratification des risques.

Assessment of clinically significant urolithiasis positivity rate using CT KUB for suspected renal colic.

BACKGROUND: Unenhanced low-dose computed tomography of the kidneys, ureter and bladder (CT KUB) is the gold standard diagnostic imaging modality in the assessment of suspected renal colic. As the radiation dose is not negligible, it is important to monitor the diagnostic yield of CT KUBs. The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic yield of CT KUB studies performed for suspected renal colic in patients presenting to the emergency department. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of 500 patients who underwent CT KUB for suspected renal colic over a seven month period from June 2019 to January 2020. Clinical information and imaging was reviewed for each patient. Statistical analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism 8 (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA). RESULTS: Forty-nine percent of patients in the series were female (248/500) and the mean age was 45. The positivity rate for obstructing ureteral calculus was 34% (169/500). Concerningly, there was a significantly lower positivity rate in females compared to males (19% versus 48%; p < 0.0001) which raises the issue of unnecessary radiation exposure to this cohort. In the 200 female patients who were negative for obstructing urolithiasis, the mean age was 43. Females also had a significantly higher rate of negative CT KUB (62% versus 37%; p < 0.0001) where no underlying alternative pathology was diagnosed. CONCLUSIONS: Women are less likely than men to have obstructing urolithiasis on CT KUB for suspected renal colic. This difference is not accounted for by a higher rate of alternative diagnoses among female patients. The findings of this study should prompt clinicians to exercise caution when considering this imaging modality in this patient cohort.

The Incidence and Risk Factors for Emergency Department Imaging in Acute Renal Colic.

Objective: To determine the incidence of and risk factors for imaging in patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with renal colic. Subject/Patients and Methods: We conducted a population-based cohort study in the province of Ontario, utilizing linked administrative health data. Patients who presented to an ED with renal colic between April 1, 2010, and June 30, 2020, were included. The rate of initial imaging (CT scans and ultrasound [U/S]) and repeat imaging within 30 days was determined. Generalized linear models were utilized to evaluate patient and institutional-level characteristics associated with imaging, and specifically CT vs U/S. Results: There were 397,491 index renal colic events, of which 67% underwent imaging (CT 68%, U/S 27%, and CT+U/S same day 5%). Repeat imaging was performed in 21% of events (U/S in 12.5%, CT in 8.4%) at a median of 10 days. Of those with an initial U/S, 28% had repeat imaging compared with 18.5% for those with an initial CT. Undergoing an initial CT was associated with being male, urban residence, later year of cohort entry, history of diabetes mellitus and inflammatory bowel disease, and presentation to nonacademic hospitals of larger size, or with a higher volume of ED visits. Conclusion: Two-thirds of renal colic patients underwent imaging, and CT was the most utilized modality. Patients undergoing an initial CT had a lower likelihood of repeat imaging within 30 days. The utilization of CT increased over time and was more common in males and those presenting to nonacademic hospitals of larger size, or with higher ED volumes. Our study highlights the patient- and institution-level factors that need to be targeted with prevention strategies to reduce the utilization of CT scans, when possible, for cost reduction and to minimize patient exposure to ionizing radiation.

Contemporary Use of Computed Tomography (CT) Imaging in Suspected Urolithiasis in Pregnancy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We aimed to examine the role of low-dose CT (LDCT) in the diagnostic work-up for suspected urolithiasis in pregnancy. We reviewed contemporary urologic recommendations for CT in pregnancy, its utilization for suspected urolithiasis, and explored barriers to its use. RECENT FINDINGS: National urologic guidelines and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommend the judicious use of LDCT imaging in pregnancy when necessary. We noted inconsistencies in review article management pathways and recommendations for CT imaging for suspected urolithiasis in pregnancy. Overall CT utilization in pregnancy for suspected urolithiasis is low. Proposed barriers to LDCT use in pregnancy include fears of litigation and misperceptions of the harm of diagnostic radiation. Recent advancements in imaging technologies for urolithiasis in pregnancy are limited. More specific diagnostic pathway recommendations from national urologic guideline bodies for when to use LDCT to investigate renal colic in pregnancy may reduce diagnostic and intervention delays.

A Real-World Cost-Effectiveness Study Evaluating Imaging Strategies for the Diagnostic Workup of Renal Colic in the Emergency Department.

Introduction Both non-contrast Computed Tomography (CT) and ultrasound (US) are used for the diagnosis of renal colic in the emergency department (ED). Although US reduces radiation exposure, its diagnostic accuracy is inferior to that of CT. In this context, data regarding the cost and organizational impact of these strategies represent essential elements in the choice of imaging; however, they remain poorly documented. Aim of the study The aim of this study was to compare the costs and effectiveness of diagnostic workup by US and CT for patients consulting with renal colic in the ED. Methods We conducted a monocentric real-life retrospective study of patients consulting for a renal colic in an ED between 1 July 2018 and 31 December 2018. We estimated length of stay (LOS), total hospital costs at 60 days including ED, and initial and repeat admissions. Patients with initial US in the ED were compared to patients with initial CT using inverse probability weighting of the propensity score calculated from demographic variables, vital parameters, and clinical presentation. We calculated the incremental cost effectiveness ratio as the difference in costs by the difference in LOS. The variability of the results was assessed using non-parametric bootstrapping. Results In this study, of the 273 patients included, 67 were patients assessed with US and 206 with CT. The average costs were €1159 (SD 1987) and €956 (SD 1462) for US and CT, respectively, and the ED LOS was 8.9 [CI 95% 8.1; 9.4] and 8.7 [CI 95% 7.9; 9.9] hours for US and CT, respectively. CT was associated with a decreased LOS by 0.139 [CI 95% -1.1; 1.5] hours and was cost-saving, with a €199 [CI 95% -745; 285] reduction per patient. Conclusion When imaging is required in the ED for suspected renal colic as recommended, there is real-life evidence that CT is a cost-effective strategy compared to US, reducing costs and LOS in the ED.

The Accuracy of Point-of-Care Ultrasound Performed by Emergency Physicians in Detecting Hydronephrosis in Patients with Renal Colic.

Objectives: This study aimed to determine the accuracy of renal point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) performed by emergency physicians in detecting hydronephrosis in patients with renal colic. Methods: This prospective cross-sectional diagnostic study was conducted at the Emergency Department (ED) of Sultan Qaboos University Hospital from February 2017 to February 2018. All adult patients with suspected renal colic and who could give informed consent were included. The emergency physicians performed POCUS on both kidneys and graded hydronephrosis as none, mild, moderate or severe. The POCUS grade was compared to the non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) grade. Results: A total of 303 participants were enrolled in the analysis. The majority of the study population comprised adult males (247 [81.5%]), and the mean age was 39 years. Among the samples, 71.3% of the patients exhibited a degree of hydronephrosis based on CT findings. Ultrasounds performed by emergency physicians had a sensitivity of 75.8% (95% CI: 69.5-81.4), specificity of 55.2% (95% CI: 44.1-65.8), a positive likelihood ratio of 1.69 (95% CI: 1.32-2.16) and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.43 (95% CI: 0.32-0.59) for hydronephrosis using CT as the criterion standard. Conclusion: When evaluating patients with suspected renal colic, a bedside renal POCUS performed by emergency physicians has a moderate sensitivity to detect hydronephrosis and grade its severity. Therefore, it should be utilised in the ED to screen patients for hydronephrosis; however, more training is required to improve the test's accuracy.

Factores de riesgo para extravasación de contraste en colico renal / Risk factors for contrast extravasation in renal colic

INTRODUCCIÓN: La ruptura no traumatica del sistema pieloureterocalicial (PUC) es una entidad clínica poco común. La causa más frecuente esla obstrucción ureteral por patología litiásica, que sepresenta hasta en un 75%. A nuestro conocimiento, noexiste en la literatura una descripción de los posiblesfactores asociados con este evento. Nuestro objetivo esanalizar las variables asociadas con la extravasaciónde contraste endovenoso en pacientes con cólico renalpor litiasis ureteral única.MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS: Se realizó un análisis retrospectivo, descriptivo, de una serie de pacientes que,en contexto de cólico renal, presentaron extravasaciónde contraste endovenoso por el sistema urinario entomografía computada (TC). Se incluyeron pacientescon litiasis ureteral única sin otra patologia asociada.Se realizó una comparación de las muestras del grupocon fuga de contraste (grupo 1) con igual número detomografías consecutivas sin fuga de contraste (grupo2) en paciente con cólico renal litiásico, en un modelode regresión logística para identificar factores de riesgo de fuga de contraste. RESULTADOS: Se registraron 117 casos de fuga decontraste desde enero de 2013 hasta julio de 2018. El86% de los litos fueron ≤ 5 mm y el 79 % se ubicaronen uréter inferior. El 72% de los pacientes presentópelvis intrarrenal. En el análisis univariado tanto ubicación en uréter inferior, litiasis ≤ 5 mm, como anatomía pielica intrarrenal aumentaron la probabilidad deextravasación. En el modelo multivariado, litiasis ≤ 5mm aumentaron cinco veces el riesgo de extravasación comparado con las mayores, la ubicación en uréter distal aumentó en tres veces y la anatomía con pelvis intrarrenal aumentó en dos veces comparado conotra ubicación y pelvis extrarrenal, respectivamente,de manera estadísticamente significativa el riesgo depresentar fuga de contraste.

INTRODUCTION: Non-traumatic rupture of the pyeloureterocaliceal system (PUC) is anuncommon clinical entity. The most frequent cause isureteral obstruction due to lithiasic pathology, whichis present in up to 75%. To our knowledge, there isno description in the literature of the possible factorsassociated with this event. Our objective is to analyzethe variables associated with intravenous contrastextravasation in patients with renal colic due to singleureteral lithiasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed aretrospective, descriptive analysis of a series ofpatients who, in the context of renal colic, presented endovenous contrast extravasation throughthe urinary system in computed tomography (CT).Patients with single ureteral lithiasis without otherassociated pathology were included. A comparisonof the samples from the group with contrast leakage (group 1) with an equal number of consecutiveCT scans without contrast leakage (group 2) in patients with renal colic lithiasis was performed in alogistic regression model to identify risk factors forcontrast leakage.RESULTS: There were 117 cases of contrast leakage from January 2013 to July 2018. Eighty-sixpercent of the lithiases were 5 mm and 79% werelocated in the lower ureter. 72% of patients presented with intrarenal pelvis. In the univariate analysisboth location in lower ureter, lithiasis 5 mm, andintrarenal pyelic anatomy increased the probability of extravasation. In multivariate model, 5 mmlithiasis increased five times the risk of extravasation compared to larger ones, the location in distalureter increased three times and the anatomy withintrarenal pelvis increased two times compared toother location and extrarenal pelvis, respectively, ina statistically significant way the risk of presentingcontrast leakage.CONCLUSION: In this series, we found an increased risk of contrast leakage in a lithiasic renalcolic in patients with intrarenal pelvic anatomy with lithiasis less

Can plain film radiography improve the emergency department detection of clinically important urinary stones?

OBJECTIVE: Physicians frequently use ultrasound to assess hydronephrosis in patients with suspected renal colic, but ultrasound has limited diagnostic sensitivity and rarely clarifies stone size or location. Consequently, up to 80% of emergency department (ED) renal colic patients undergo confirmatory CT imaging. Our goal was to estimate x-ray sensitivity for urinary stones and determine whether x-ray substantially improves stone detection (sensitivity) compared to hydronephrosis assessment alone. METHODS: We reviewed imaging reports from all renal colic patients who underwent x-ray and CT at four EDs. For each patient, we documented stone size, location and hydronephrosis severity on CT and whether stones were identified on x-ray. We considered moderate and severe hydronephrosis (MS-Hydro) as significant positive findings, then calculated the sensitivity (detection rate) of MS-Hydro and x-ray for large stones ≥5 mm and for stones likely to require intervention (all ureteral stones >7 mm and proximal or middle stones >5 mm). We then tested a diagnostic algorithm adding x-ray to hydronephrosis assessment. RESULTS: Among 1026 patients with 1527 stones, MS-Hydro sensitivity was 39% for large stones and 60% for interventional stones. X-ray sensitivity was 46% for large stones and 52% for interventional stones. Adding x-ray to hydronephrosis assessment increased sensitivity in all stone categories, specifically from 39% to 68% for large stones (gain = 29%; 95%CI, 23% to 35%) and from 60% to 82% for interventional stones (gain = 22%; 95%CI, 13% to 30%). Because CT and ultrasound show strong agreement for MS-Hydro identification, physicians who depend on ultrasound-based hydronephrosis assessment could achieve similar gains by adding x-ray. CONCLUSIONS: Adding x-ray to hydronephrosis assessment substantially improves diagnostic sensitivity, enabling the detection of nearly 70% of large stones and over 80% of interventional stones. This level of sensitivity may be sufficient to reassure physicians about a renal colic diagnosis without CT imaging for many patients.

Hydronephrosis severity clarifies prognosis and guides management for emergency department patients with acute ureteral colic.

OBJECTIVE: In emergency department patients with ureteral colic, the prognostic value of hydronephrosis is unclear. Our goal was to determine whether hydronephrosis can differentiate low-risk patients appropriate for trial of spontaneous passage from those with clinically important stones likely to experience passage failure. METHODS: We used administrative data and structured chart review to evaluate a consecutive cohort of patients with ureteral stones who had a CT at nine Canadian hospitals in two cities. We used CT, the gold standard for stone imaging, to assess hydronephrosis and stone size. We described classification accuracy of hydronephrosis severity for detecting large (≥ 5 mm) stones. In patients attempting spontaneous passage we used hierarchical Bayesian regression to determine the association of hydronephrosis with passage failure, defined by the need for rescue intervention within 60 days. To illustrate prognostic utility, we reported pre-test probability of passage failure among all eligible patients (without hydronephrosis guidance) to post-test probability of passage failure in each hydronephrosis group. RESULTS: Of 3251 patients, 70% male and mean age 51, 38% had a large stone, including 23%, 29%, 53% and 72% with absent, mild, moderate and severe hydronephrosis. Passage failure rates were 15%, 20%, 28% and 43% in the respective hydronephrosis categories, and 23% overall. "Absent or mild" hydronephrosis identified a large subset of patients (64%) with low passage failure rates. Moderate hydronephrosis predicted slightly higher, and severe hydronephrosis substantially higher passage failure risk. CONCLUSIONS: Absent and mild hydronephrosis identify low-risk patients unlikely to experience passage failure, who may be appropriate for trial of spontaneous passage without CT imaging. Moderate hydronephrosis is weakly associated with larger stones but not with significantly greater passage failure. Severe hydronephrosis is an important finding that warrants definitive imaging and referral. Differentiating "moderate-severe" from "absent-mild" hydronephrosis provides risk stratification value. More granular hydronephrosis grading is not prognostically helpful.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Chez les patients des services d'urgence (SU) atteints de colique urétérale, la valeur pronostique de l'hydronéphrose n'est pas claire. Notre objectif était de déterminer si l'hydronéphrose peut différencier les patients à faible risque appropriés pour l'essai de passage spontané de ceux qui ont des calculs cliniquement importants susceptibles de subir un échec de passage. MéTHODES: Nous avons utilisé des données administratives et un examen structuré des dossiers pour évaluer une cohorte consécutive de patients atteints de calculs urétéraux qui avaient subi une tomodensitométrie dans neuf hôpitaux canadiens de deux villes. Nous avons utilisé la tomodensitométrie, l'étalon-or pour l'imagerie des calculs, pour évaluer l'hydronéphrose et la taille des calculs. Nous avons décrit la précision de la classification de la gravité de l'hydronéphrose pour la détection de gros calculs (> 5 mm). Chez les patients tentant un passage spontané, nous avons utilisé la régression bayésienne hiérarchique pour déterminer l'association de l'hydronéphrose avec l'échec du passage, défini par le besoin d'intervention de sauvetage dans les 60 jours. Pour illustrer l'utilité pronostique, nous avons signalé la probabilité d'échec de passage avant le test chez tous les patients admissibles (sans directives sur l'hydronéphrose) à la probabilité d'échec de passage post-test dans chaque groupe d'hydronéphrose. RéSULTATS: Sur 3251 patients, 70% d'hommes et d'âge moyen 51 ans, 38% avaient un gros calcul, dont 23%, 29%, 53% et 72% avec une hydronéphrose absente, légère, modérée et sévère. Les taux d'échec au passage étaient de 15%, 20%, 28% et 43% dans les catégories d'hydronéphrose respectives et de 23% dans l'ensemble. L'hydronéphrose « absente ou légère ¼ a permis d'identifier un sous-ensemble important de patients (64%) présentant de faibles taux d'échec au passage. Une hydronéphrose modérée prédisait un risque d'échec de passage légèrement plus élevé, et une hydronéphrose sévère un risque sensiblement plus élevé. CONCLUSIONS: L'absence d'hydronéphrose et une hydronéphrose légère permettent d'identifier les patients à faible risque, peu susceptibles d'avoir un échec de passage, qui peuvent être appropriés pour un essai de passage spontané sans imagerie CT. Une hydronéphrose modérée est faiblement associée à des calculs plus gros mais pas à un échec de passage significativement plus important. L'hydronéphrose sévère est une constatation importante qui justifie une imagerie définitive et une référence. Différencier l'hydronéphrose « modérée-sévère ¼ de l'« absence-légère ¼ fournit une valeur de stratification du risque. Un classement plus granulaire de l'hydronéphrose n'est pas utile sur le plan pronostique.

Reported and Unreported Potentially Important Incidental Findings in Urgent Nonenhanced Abdominal CT for Renal Colic.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to retrospectively evaluate the prevalence of reported and unreported potentially important incidental findings (PIFs) in consecutive nonenhanced abdominal CTs performed specifically for renal colic in the urgent setting. METHODS: One radiologist, blinded to the finalized report, retrospectively re-evaluated nonenhanced abdominal CTs performed from January to December 2017 on adult patients from the emergency department with the specific request of urgent evaluation for renal colic, searching for PIFs. RESULTS: The CTs of 312 patients were included in the study. Thirty-eight findings were reported in 38 different CTs, whereas the re-evaluation added 47 unreported findings in 47 different CTs, adding to total of 85 findings (27%). The difference in the proportion of reported and unreported PIFs between the original report and re-evaluation was significant (p < 0.001). No significant difference was found between the age of patients with and without reported findings. The proportion of potentially important findings did not vary significantly among the 3 shifts in the original report and in re-evaluation. The most frequent findings, both reported and unreported, were pleural effusion, lymphadenopathies, and liver nodules. CONCLUSIONS: Potentially important additional findings are frequently present in urgent nonenhanced abdominal CTs performed for renal colic, and many are not described in the finalized reports. Radiologists should take care not to underreport PIFs even in the urgent setting because of the possible consequences on the patient's health and in order to avoid legal issues, while at the same time satisfying the need for timely and efficient reporting.

CT KUB scans for renal colic: Optimisation of scan range to reduce patient radiation burden.

INTRODUCTION: Non-contrast CT KUB scans performed to assess renal colic should be limited to scanning between the upper pole of the highest kidney and the pubic symphysis to minimise unnecessary irradiation. This audit aimed to assess the amount of overscanning in CT KUBs outside this range. METHODS: CT KUB scans taken over a 10-day period were assessed. Unnecessary overscan above the highest kidney was measured as a percentage of the total scan range. A target of less than 10% overscanning was set. The vertebral position of the upper pole of the highest kidney was also measured and compared to the actual level of the scan. RESULTS: 88 patients were assessed. 89.8% (79/88) of scans didn't meet the target of less than 10% overscanning above the highest kidney, and were associated with a higher radiation dose to the patient. The average overscanning above the highest pole of the kidney was 16.4% of the whole scan. The average overscan below the pubic symphysis was 1.54%. We also found that 100% of scanned kidneys lied below the upper border of the T11 vertebra, in spite of scans starting as high as T7. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of scans included unnecessary overscanning above the highest kidney. We have identified the upper border of the T11 vertebral body as a potential location from which to begin the upper margin of a CT KUB scan. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: By starting CT KUB scans at the upper border of the T11 vertebral body, we can allow the whole kidney to be imaged while minimising unnecessary overscanning above the kidney, thus lowering excess patient irradiation while still producing high quality scans.

Seasonal variation in the incidence of acute renal colic.

Urolithiasis is a prevalent medical disease affecting the general population. Many epidemiological studies reported an association between a geographic area with a high mean daily temperature and urolithiasis disease. However, it is unclear if the seasonal variation in a high temperature geographical area will affect the acute presentation of renal colic to the emergency department. The aim of this study was to identify the effect of the seasonal variation on the presentation with acute urolithiasis disease. The design was a retrospective chart review, using the database in King Abdulaziz Medical City that was retrieved by the data management office in King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The study period was from January 26, 2016, to the end of December 2019. All patients who presented with renal colic, and diagnosed with urolithiasis using a noncontrast-enhanced computed tomography scan, have been included. A total of 1057 patients were included in this study. The majority (71.24%, n = 753) were male, and the mean age was 42.33 ± 16.12 years. The highest proportion presented in summer (31.22%), followed by spring (26.87%), fall (24.12%), and winter (17.79%). The majority of the sample (84.77%) presented with ureteral stones, and 15.23%with kidney stones. Most of the sample (78.33%) had no history of previous stone formation, with 21.67% being current stone former. The acute presentation with urolithiasis is higher during summer, followed by spring, fall, and winter. A public educational program is highly recommended to increase awareness about stone formation and the appropriate avoidance methods. To this end, additional research is required to understand the stone composition and appropriate methods to avoid developing urolithiasis.

Imaging strategies for patients with suspicion of uncomplicated colic pain: diagnostic accuracy and management assessment.

OBJECTIVE: Compare different imaging scenarios in the diagnosis of uncomplicated renal colic due to urolithiasis (URCU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 206 prospectively included patients had been admitted with suspected URCU and had undergone abdominal plain film (APF), US and unenhanced CT after clinical STONE score evaluation. CT was the reference standard. We assessed sensitivity (Se), specificity (Spe) and Youden index for colic pain diagnosis, percentage of patients managed by urologic treatment with stone identified, percentage of alternative diagnoses (AD) and exposure to radiation, according to single imaging approaches, strategies driven by patient characteristics and conditional imaging strategies after APF and US. RESULTS: One hundred (48.5%) patients had a final diagnosis of URCU and 19 underwent urologic treatment. The conditional strategy, i.e. CT in patients who had no stone identified at US, had a perfect sensitivity and specificity. This enabled diagnosis of all stones requiring urology management while decreasing the number of CT exams by 22%. The strategy whereby CT was used when there was neither direct or indirect APF + US finding of colic pain nor alternative diagnoses in patients with a STONE score ≥ 10 had a sensitivity of 0.95 and a specificity of 0.99, identified 84% of stones managed by urologic treatment and decreased the number of CT examinations by 76%. CONCLUSION: In patients with clinical findings consistent with URCU, the use of ultrasound as first-line imaging modality, with CT restricted to patients with negative US and a STONE score ≥ 10, led to a sensitivity and specificity of above 95%, identified 84% of stones requiring urological management and reduced the number of CT scans needed by fourfold. KEY POINTS: • For diagnosis, the use of APF + US as first-line imaging, with CT restricted to patients with both a normal APF + US and a STONE score ≥ 10, provides both a sensitivity and specificity superior or equal to 95% and reduces the number of CT scans necessary by fourfold. • For management, the use of APF + US as first-line imaging, with CT restricted to patients with both a normal APF + US and a STONE score ≥ 10, maintains a 84% stone identification rate in urology-treated patients.

Intradermal sterile water injection versus diclofenac sodium in acute renal colic pain: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of intracutaneous sterile water injection (ISWI) to relieve the pain of acute renal colic compared with diclofenac and placebo. METHODS: The study included 150 patients presented to the Emergency Department with renal colic randomized into 3 groups: control group received intracutaneous injections of 0.5 cm3 isotonic saline in the flank, group A received intracutaneous injections of 0.5 cm3 ISWI in the flank, and group B received an intramuscular injection of 75 mg Diclofenac in the gluteal region. The severity of the pain was assessed by a visual analogue scale system at baseline and 30, 45 min, and 60 min after injections. Subjects with inadequate pain relief at 1 h received rescue analgesia. RESULTS: The mean baseline pain score was 9.6 ± 0.61 in the ISWI group, 9.72 ± 0.64 in the diclofenac group and 9.26 ± 0.89 in the control group. The mean pain score at 30 min of the control group was reduced to 6.9 ± 1.56. This mean at 30 min after ISWI and diclofenac injections were reduced to 1.98 ± 1.41 and 1.88 ± 1.19 respectively. The mean of pain sore of the ISWI and diclofenac group at 45 and 60 min was constant. Rescue analgesics at 1 h were required by 47 patients receiving the saline injection and by 4 patients and by 7 patients receiving ISWI and diclofenac injection respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ISWI and diclofenac were equally effective for the pain relief of acute renal colic.

The use of computed tomography as the first imaging modality in patients with renal colic and microscopic haematuria.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the use of computed tomography (CT) as the first imaging modality in patients with renal colic and microscopic haematuria. METHODOLOGY: The patients that presented to the emergency service of six health centers with renal colic between January 2017 and January 2018 and were found to have microscopic hematuria on urinalysis were retrospectively evaluated. Only patients for whom non-contrast CT was used as the first imaging modality were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups according to the stone presence (stone +, stone -) and the groups were compared in terms of demographics and clinical characteristics of patients. RESULTS: A total of 834 patients were included in the study and 711 (85.3%) were diagnosed with urolithiasis. CT also revealed additional pathology in 26 (3.1%) patients. The male patients had a significantly higher rate of stones than female patients (89.5% vs 75.2%; P < .001) and the BMI values were also significantly higher in the male patients compared with the females (27.0 ± 2.1 vs 25.0 ± 4.0, P < .001). Right renal colic was more common in female patients and the rate of left renal colic was significantly higher in male patients. The male patients diagnosed with stone disease required treatment at a higher rate than the female patients (P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: Because of its high sensitivity and specificity values in the diagnosis of stone disease, easy applicability and fast results, CT can be safely used as the first imaging modality for the diagnosis of renal colic and microscopic haematuria.

Hospitalización en paciente con cólico renal: Caracterización clínico-epidemiológica en el Hospital Clínico Herminda Martín, período marzo 2014 - marzo 2019 / Hospitalization in a patient with renal colic: Clinical-epidemiological characterization at the Herminda Martín Clinical Hospital, period March 2014 - March 2019

INTRODUCCIÓN: El cólico renal es una condición médica común en los servicios de urgencia. Representa la manifestación clínica más frecuente de urolitiasis, cuya patogenia es multifactorial, con tasas de prevalencia varía de 1% a 20% y una recurrencia a 10 años del 42% al 50%. OBJETIVO: Establecer el perfil clínico-epidemiológico, como también el diagnóstico y manejo de los pacientes hospitalizados por cólico renal en el Hospital Clínico Herminda Martín (HCHCM). MATERIAL Y MÉTODO: Estudio descriptivo retrospectivo en pacientes hospitalizados con diagnóstico de cólico renal en el HCHM de Chillán en el período marzo 2014-marzo 2019. Se estudiaron las variables: sexo, edad, presentación clínica de ingreso, factores de riesgo asociados, motivo de hospitalización, resultados imagenológicos y manejo clínico. Resultados. El 52,45% correspondió a pacientes de sexo masculino, encontrándose la mayor cantidad de pacientes en el intervalo de 40-49 años. La obesidad, antecedente de urolitiasis e hipertensión arterial fueron las patologías asociadas más frecuentes. En la mayoría de los pacientes, el motivo de la hospitalización fue la refractariedad al tratamiento analgésico, alcanzando un 86,76%. El 56,37% de los pacientes recibió manejo médico expulsivo y a un 19,11% de los pacientes se le realizó una intervención quirúrgica durante la hospitalización. CONCLUSIÓN: El perfil de éstos pacientes no sólo permite establecer medidas que podrían evitar un evento litiásico, sino que además se demuestra la necesidad de realizar un manejo óptimo que puede evitar reconsultas, sobrecarga de los servicios de urgencia, aumento de días cama y complicaciones.

INTRODUCTION: Renal colic is a common condition in the emergency department. It represents the most frequent clinical manifestation of urolithiasis, whose prevalence rate varies between 1% to 20%. Its pathogenesis is multifactorial, with a recurrence of 10 years from 42-50%. OBJECTIVE: Establish the clinical-epidemiological profile, as well as the diagnosis and management of patients hospitalized for renal colic at the Herminda Martín Clinical Hospital(HCHM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective descriptive study of hospitalized patients diagnosed with renal colic at the HCHM, March 2014-March 2019, the variables were studied: sex, age, the clinical presentation of admission, associated risk factors, the reason for hospitalization, imaging results, and management. Results: 52.45% were male patients, with the highest number of patients in the range of 40-49 years. Obesity, a history of urolithiasis and hypertension, occurred more frequently within the associated pathologies. In most patients, refractable to analgesic treatment was the reason for hospitalization, reaching 86.76%. 56.37% of patients received expulsion medical management, and 19.11% of patientshad surgeryduring hospitalization. CONCLUSION: The profile of these patients not only allows them to establish measures that could prevent a lithiasis event but also shows the need for effective management of patients who can avoid reconsults, an overload of emergency services, increasedbed days and complications

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.