Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Urology Reports
Published in: Current Urology Reports 2/2010

01-03-2010

Evaluation and Follow-Up of Patients with Urinary Lithiasis: Minimizing Radiation Exposure

Authors: Elias S. Hyams, Ojas Shah

Published in: Current Urology Reports | Issue 2/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

As unenhanced computed tomography (CT) has supplanted other modalities (eg, intravenous urography, ultrasonography) as the “test of choice” for evaluation of stone disease, patients have been exposed to higher doses of ionizing radiation in both primary evaluation and follow-up. There has been progressive recognition that low doses of radiation in the range of conventional CT may increase the long-term risk of cancer in exposed patients; these data have been extrapolated from longitudinal and ongoing study of atomic bomb survivors. There have been mounting efforts to develop alternative approaches to conventional CT (eg, low-dose protocols, substitution of ultrasound/plain X-ray) to provide comparable data while reducing total radiation exposure. It is essential that urologists collaborate with radiologists, emergency room physicians, and other providers to appropriately balance the theoretical risks and practical benefits of ionizing radiation in the diagnosis of stone disease.
Literature
1.
Brenner D, Elliston C, Hall E, et al.: Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001, 176:289–296.PubMed
2.
Donnelly LF: Reducing radiation dose associated with pediatric CT by decreasing unnecessary examinations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005, 184:655–657.PubMed
3.
Heidenreich A, Desgranschamps F, Terrier F: Modern approach of diagnosis and management of acute flank pain: review of all imaging modalities. Eur Urol 2002, 41:351–362.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Mettler FA Jr, Wiest PW, Locken JA, et al.: CT scanning: patterns of use and dose. J Radiol Prot 2000, 20:353–359.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Lee CI, Haims AH, Monico EP, et al.: Diagnostic CT scans: assessment of patient, physician, and radiologist awareness of radiation dose and possible risks. Radiology 2004, 231:393–398.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Sodickson A, Baeyens PF, Andriole KP, et al.: Recurrent CT, cumulative radiation exposure, and associated radiation-induced cancer risks from CT of adults. Radiology 2009, 251:175–184.CrossRefPubMed
7.
•• Brenner DJ, Hall EJ: Computed tomography: an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007, 357:2277–2284. This review article comprehensively describes upward trends in the use of CT, risks associated with low-dose radiation exposure, and strategies for decreasing exposure for medical patients. CrossRefPubMed
8.
ICRP Publication 60: 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection, 60. Ann ICRP 1991, 21:1–3.
9.
Hamm M, Knopfle E, Wartenberg S, et al.: Low dose unenhanced helical computerized tomography for the evaluation of acute flank pain. J Urol 2002, 167:1687–1691.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Preston DL, Shimizu Y, Pierce DA, et al.: Studies of mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 13: Solid cancer and noncancer disease mortality: 1950–1997. Radiat Res 2003, 160:381–407.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Brenner DJ, Doll R, Goodhead DT, et al.: Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing what we really know. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003, 100:13761–13766.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Preston DL, Pierce DA, Shimizu Y, et al.: Effect of recent changes in atomic bomb survivor dosimetry on cancer mortality risk estimates. Radiat Res 2004, 162:377–389.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Preston DL, Ron E, Tokuoka S, et al.: Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors: 1958–1998. Radiation Res 2007, 168:1–64.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Little MP: Cancer and non-cancer effects in Japanese atomic bomb survivors. J Radiol Prot 2009, 29:A43–A59.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Pierce DA, Shimizu Y, Preston DL, et al.: Studies of the mortality of atomic bomb survivors. Report 12, Part I. Cancer: 1950–1990. Radiat Res 1996, 146:1–27.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Pierce DA, Preston DL: Radiation-related cancer risks at low doses among atomic bomb survivors. Radiat Res 2000, 154:178–186.CrossRefPubMed
17.
18.
Cardis E, Vrijheid M, Blettner M, et al.: The 15-Country Collaborative Study of Cancer Risk among Radiation Workers in the Nuclear Industry: estimates of radiation- related cancer risks. Radiat Res 2007, 167:396–416.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Preston DL, Cullings H, Suyama A, et al.: Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors exposed in utero or as young children. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008, 100:428–436.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Morin Doody M, Lonstein JE, Stovall M, et al.: Breast cancer mortality after diagnostic radiography: findings from the U.S. Scoliosis Cohort Study. Spine 2000, 25:2052–2063.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Infante-Rivard C, Mathonnet G, Sinnett D: Risk of childhood leukemia associated with diagnostic irradiation and polymorphisms in DNA repair genes. Environ Health Perspect 2000, 108:495–498.CrossRefPubMed
22.
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. Urol 2000, 56:53–57.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Sourtzis S, Thibeau JF, Damry N, et al.: Radiologic investigation of renal colic: unenhanced helical CT compared with excretory urography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999, 172:1491–1494.PubMed
24.
Catalano O, Nunziata A, Altei F, et al.: Suspected ureteral colic: primary helical CT versus selective helical CT after unenhanced radiography and sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002, 178:379–387.PubMed
25.
Fielding JR, Silverman SG, Rubin GD: Helical CT of the urinary tract. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999, 172:1199–1206.PubMed
26.
Williams JC Jr, Kim SC, Zarse CA, et al.: Progress in the use of helical CT for imaging urinary calculi. J Endourol 2004, 18:937–941.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Poletti PA, 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, 188:927–933.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Kluner C, Hein PA, Gralla O, et al.: Does ultra-low-dose CT with a radiation dose equivalent to that of KUB suffice to detect renal and ureteral calculi? J Comput Assist Tomogr 2006, 30:44–50.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Katz D, McGahan JP, Gerscovich EO, et al.: Correlation of ureteral stone measurements by CT and plain film radiography: utility of the KUB. J Endourol 2003, 17:847–850.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Narepalem N, Sundaram CP, Boridy IC, et al.: Comparison of helical computerized tomography and plain radiography for estimating urinary stone size. J Urol 2002, 167:1235–1238.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Fowler MAB, Locken JA, Duchesne JH, et al.: US for detecting renal calculi with nonenhanced CT as a reference standard. Radiology 2002, 222:109–113.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Yilmaz S, Sindel T, Arslan G, et al.: Renal colic: comparison of spiral CT, US and IVU in the detection of ureteral calculi. Eur Radiol 1998, 8:212–217.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Sheafor DH, Hertzberg BS, Freed KS, et al.: Nonenhanced helical CT and US in the emergency evaluation of patients with renal colic: prospective comparison. Radiology 2000, 217:792–797.PubMed
34.
Ripolles T, Agramunt M, Errando J, et al.: Suspected ureteral colic: plain film and sonography vs. unenhanced helical CT. A prospective study of 66 patients. Eur Radiol 2004, 14:129–136.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Shokeir AA, Mahran MR, Abdulmaaboud M: Renal colic in pregnant women: role of renal resistive index. Urology 2000, 55:344–347.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Shokeir AA, Abdulmaaboud M: Prospective comparison of nonenhanced helical computerized tomography and Doppler ultrasonography for the diagnosis of renal colic. J Urol 2001, 165:1082–1084.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Sudah M, Vanninen R, Partanen K, et al.: MR urography in evaluation of acute flank pain: T2-weighted sequences and gadolinium-enhanced three-dimensional FLASH compared with urography. Fast low-angle shot. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001, 176:105–112.PubMed
38.
Keeley FX Jr, Thornton M: Radiation safety: implications for urologists and patients. J Urol 2009, 181:443–444.CrossRefPubMed
39.
• Ferrandino MN, Bagrodia A, Pierre SA, et al.: Radiation exposure in the acute and short term management of urolithiasis at 2 academic centers. J Urol 2009, 181:668–673. This unique study attempts to quantify the cumulative radiation dose in patients with an acute stone event, and demonstrates that a significant minority of patients have exposure above a safety threshold. CrossRefPubMed
40.
Wall BF, Hart D: Revised radiation doses for typical X-ray examinations: report on a recent review of doses to patients from medical X-ray examinations in the UK by NRPB. Br J Rad 1997, 70:437–439.
41.
Katz SI, Saluja S, Brink JA, et al.: Radiation dose associated with unenhanced CT for suspected renal colic: impact of repetitive studies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006, 186:1120–1124.CrossRefPubMed
42.
John BS, Patel U, Anson K: What radiation exposure can a patient expect during a single stone episode? J Endourol 2008, 22:429–422.CrossRef
43.
Martin CJ, Sutton DG, Sharp PF: Balancing patient dose and image quality. Appl Radiat Isot 1999, 50:1–19.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Paulson EK, Weaver C, Ho LM, et al.: Conventional and reduced radiation dose of 16-MDCT for detection of nephrolithiasis and ureterolithiasis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008, 190:151–157.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Katz DS, Venkataramanan N, Napel S, et al.: Can low-dose unenhanced multidetector CT be used for routine evaluation of suspected renal colic? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003, 180:313–315.PubMed
46.
Kim BS, Hwang IK, Choi YW, et al.: Low-dose and standard dose unenhanced helical computed tomography for the assessment of acute renal colic: prospective comparative study. Acta Radiol 2005, 46:756–763.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Heneghan JP, McGuire KA, Leder RA, et al.: Helical CT for nephrolithiasis and ureterolithiasis: comparison of conventional and reduced radiation-dose techniques. Radiology 2003, 229:575–580.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Leusmann DB, Niggemann H, Roth S, et al.: Recurrence rates and severity of urinary calculi. Scand J Urol Nephrol 1995, 29:279–283.CrossRefPubMed
49.
Andonian S, Atalla MA: Radiation safety in urology. AUA Update Ser 2009, Lesson 26, 28:237–247.
Metadata
Title
Evaluation and Follow-Up of Patients with Urinary Lithiasis: Minimizing Radiation Exposure
Authors
Elias S. Hyams
Ojas Shah
Publication date
01-03-2010
Publisher
Current Science Inc.
Published in
Current Urology Reports / Issue 2/2010
Print ISSN: 1527-2737
Electronic ISSN: 1534-6285
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-010-0092-x

Other articles of this Issue 2/2010

Current Urology Reports 2/2010 Go to the issue

ReviewPaper

Urinary Tract Infections in Children: Recommendations for Antibiotic Prophylaxis and Evaluation. An Evidence-Based Approach

ReviewPaper

Endopyelotomy in the Age of Laparoscopic and Robotic-Assisted Pyeloplasty

ReviewPaper

Urologic Sports Injuries in Children

ReviewPaper

Conservative Nonsurgical Management of Spina Bifida

ReviewPaper

Residency Training Program Paradigms for Teaching Robotic Surgical Skills to Urology Residents

ReviewPaper

Adjuncts to Improve Outcomes of Shock Wave Lithotripsy