Emergency department non-contrast computed tomography for suspicion of obstructive urolithiasis: Yield and consequences
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.7570Keywords:
Urolithiasis, Computed tomography, Emergency medicine, Incidental findingsAbstract
Introduction: We aimed to analyze patterns of referral, yield, and clinical implications of non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) in the acute evaluation of flank pain suspected as obstructive urolithiasis (OU) in a high-volume emergency department (ED).
Methods: The study comprised 506 consecutive NCCTs performed in the ED over four months. Detection rates of OU, incidental, and alternative findings were calculated. Imaging signs suspicious for recent passage of stones were considered positive for OU, while renal stones without signs of obstruction were considered unrelated to the acute presentation. OU, other findings requiring hospitalization, and incidental findings warranting further workup were considered situations in which NCCTs were warranted.
Results: NCCTs confirmed an OU diagnosis in 162 (32%) patients and non-clinically significant nephrolithiasis in 125 (25%). They revealed other findings in 108 (21%) patients, including 42 (8%) with clinically significant incidental findings and 26 (5%) with alternative diagnoses requiring hospitalization. NCCTs were entirely negative in 111 (22%) patients. Corroboration of these outcomes, together with overlapping of OU, incidental, and alternative significant findings in some patients resulted in an overall justified NCCT request rate of 44%.
Conclusions: The yield of NCCT performed in acute presentations of flank pain suspected as OU is relatively low, and over one-half of the scans are unwarranted. The pattern of requesting NCCT in the ED needs refinement to avoid abuse that may lead to radiation overexposure, psychological burden, physical harm, and financial overload.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:
- Post the Article on any Web site
- Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
- Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
- Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.
The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.
You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.
The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:
- That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
- That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
- That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
- That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.
