Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-05T15:52:02.689Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Utility of computed tomography and derivation and validation of a score to identify an emergent outcome in 2,315 patients with suspected urinary tract stone

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2015

F. Kris Aubrey-Bassler ,
Scott D. Lee ,
Richard B. Barter ,
Shabnam Asghari ,
Richard Cullen  and
Marshall Godwin
F. Kris Aubrey-Bassler*
Affiliation:
Centre for Rural Health Studies, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, NL Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, NL
Scott D. Lee
Affiliation:
Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS
Richard B. Barter
Affiliation:
Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, NL
Shabnam Asghari
Affiliation:
Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, NL Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, NL
Richard Cullen
Affiliation:
Centre for Rural Health Studies, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, NL Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, NL
Marshall Godwin
Affiliation:
Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University, St. John's, NL
*
Primary Healthcare Research Unit, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Agnes Cowan Hostel, Room 427, 300 Prince Philip Drive, St. John's, NL A1B 3V6; kaubrey@mun.ca

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

Because a majority of urinary tract stones (UTSs) pass spontaneously and clinically significant alternative pathology is rare, we hypothesize that many computed tomographic (CT) scans to diagnose them are likely unnecessary. We sought to measure the impact of renal CT scans on resource use and to justify a prospective study to derive a score that predicts an emergent diagnosis in patients with suspected UTS by doing so in our retrospective series.

Methods:

We conducted a retrospective study of ED patients who had noncontrast CT of the abdomen for suspected UTS. A split-sample was used to derive and validate a score to predict the presence of an emergent diagnosis on CT.

Results:

Of the 2,315 patients (50.8% female, mean age 45 years), 49 (2.1%) had an emergent outcome observed on CT. An additional 12 (0.5%) patients had an urgent outcome and 239 (10.6%) had a urologic procedure within 8 weeks of the CT. Serum white blood cell count, highest temperature, urine red blood cell count, and the presence of abdominal pain were significant predictors of the primary outcome. A score derived using these predictors had a potential range of 22 (0.26% predicted risk, 0.5% actual risk of the outcome) to 6 (52% predicted risk). The score was moderately discriminatory with c-statistics of 0.752 (derivation) and 0.668 (validation) and accurate with Hosmer-Lemeshow statistics of 10.553 (p = 0.228, derivation) and 9.70 (p = 0.286, validation).

Conclusions:

A sensible, relevant score derived and validated on all patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of renal colic could be useful in reducing abdominal CT scan ordering.

Keywords

diagnostic errorsdecision support techniquesemergency medicinenephrolithiasisx-ray computed tomography
Type
Original Research • Recherche originale
Information
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine , Volume 15 , Issue 5 , September 2013 , pp. 261 - 269
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2013

References

REFERENCES

1.Preminger, GM, Tiselius, H, Assimos, DG, et al. 2007 guideline for the management of ureteral calculi. J Urol 2007;178:2418–34, doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.09.107.Google Scholar
2.Brenner, DJ, Hall, EJ. Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2277–84, doi:10.1056/NEJMra072149.Google Scholar
3.Broder, J, Bowen, J, Lohr, J, et al. Cumulative CT exposures in emergency department patients evaluated for suspected renal colic. J Emerg Med 2007;33:161–8, doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2006.12.035.Google Scholar
4.Graham, A, Luber, S, Wolfson, AB. Urolithiasis in the emergency department. Emerg Med Clin North Am 2011;29:519–38, doi:10.1016/j.emc.2011.04.007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Curhan, GC, Aronson, MD, Preminger, GM. Diagnosis and acute management of suspected nephrolithiasis in adults. In: Goldfarb, S, O’Leary, MP, editors. UpToDate. 20.7th ed. Waltham (MA): UpToDate; 2012.Google Scholar
6.Ha, M, MacDonald, RD. Impact of CT scan in patients with first episode of suspected nephrolithiasis. J Emerg Med 2004; 27:225–31, doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2004.04.009.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Abramson, S, Walders, N, Applegate, KE, Gilkeson, RC, et al. Impact in the emergency department of unenhanced CT on diagnostic confidence and therapeutic efficacy in patients with suspected renal colic: a prospective survey. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;175:1689–95.Google Scholar
8.Katz, DS, Scheer, M, Lumerman, JH, et al. Alternative or additional diagnoses on unenhanced helical computed tomography for suspected renal colic: experience with 1000 consecutive examinations. Urology 2000;56:53–7, doi:10.1016/S0090-4295(00)00584-7.Google Scholar
9.Population and dwelling counts, for Canada, provinces and territories, 2006 and 2001 censuses - 100% data. 2010. Available at: http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/hlt/97-550/Index.cfm?TPL=P1C&Page=RETR&LANG=Eng&T=101 (accessed January 15, 2012).Google Scholar
10.Sauerbrei, W, Meier-Hirmer, C, Benner, A, et al. Multivariable regression model building by using fractional polynomials: description of SAS, Stata and R programs. Comput Stat Data Anal 2006;50:3464–85, doi:10.1016/j.csda.2005.07.015.Google Scholar
11.Sullivan, LM, Massaro, JM, D’Agostino, RB Sr.Presentation of multivariate data for clinical use: the Framingham study risk score functions. Stat Med 2004;23:1631–60, doi:10.1002/sim.1742.Google Scholar
12.Harrell, FEJ. Regression modeling strategies. New York City: Springer-Verlag; 2001.Google Scholar
13.Gottlieb, RH, La, TC, Erturk, EN, et al. CT in detecting urinary tract calculi: influence on patient imaging and clinical outcomes. Radiology 2002;225:441–9, doi:10.1148/radiol.2252020101.Google Scholar
14.Poletti, P, Platon, A, Rutschmann, OT, et al. Low-dose versus standard-dose CT protocol in patients with clinically suspected renal colic. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188:927–33, doi:10.2214/AJR.06.0793.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Heneghan, JP, McGuire, KA, Leder, RA, et al. Helical CT for nephrolithiasis and ureterolithiasis: comparison of conventional and reduced radiation-dose techniques. Radiology 2003;229:575–80, doi:10.1148/radiol.2292021261.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Smith, R, Verga, M, McCarthy, S, et al. Diagnosis of acute flank pain: value of unenhanced helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996;166:97–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed