Copyright
©2011 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Radiol. Nov 28, 2011; 3(11): 256-265
Published online Nov 28, 2011. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v3.i11.256
Published online Nov 28, 2011. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v3.i11.256
Table 1 Major indications for evaluation of the urinary tract using computed tomography
Urinary colic |
Hematuria |
Complicated infection |
Neoplasm |
Renal donor evaluation |
Congenital anomalies |
Structural abnormalities |
Abdominal trauma |
Table 2 Radiation dose, scanning parameters, and diagnostic performances of computed tomography examination using low dose protocols in urolithiasis
Authors | Yr | Low dose CT protocols | Diagnostic performance | Effective dose (mSv) | ||||||
CT scanner | kVp | mA (mAs) | Pitch | S.T. (mm) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Accuracy (%) | |||
Liu et al[7] | 2000 | SDCT | 120 | (280) | 2 | 7 | 97 | 96 | 97 | 2.8 |
Meagher et al[8] | 2001 | SDCT, 4MDCT | 120-130 | 63-130 | 1.4-1.8 | 5 | 93 | NA | NA | 3.5 (2.8-4.5) |
Hamm et al[9] | 2002 | 4MDCT | 120 | 70 | 2 | 5 | 96 | 97 | NA | 1.5 |
Heneghan et al[10] | 2003 | SDCT | 140 | 100 (76) | 1.5 | 5 | NA | NA | 90-94 | 6.4 |
4MDCT | 0.75 | 11 | ||||||||
Tack et al[11] | 2003 | 4MDCT | 120 | (30) | 1.5 | 3 | 90-95 | 94-100 | 93-98 | 1.2-1.9 |
Knöpfle et al[12] | 2003 | 4MDCT | 120 | 70 | 2 | 5 | 98 | 97 | NA | 0.97 (male)/ 1.35 (female) |
Kluner et al[13] | 2006 | 16MDCT | 120 | 20 (6.9) | 1.43 | 5 | 97 | 95 | NA | 0.5-0.7 |
Poletti et al[14] | 2007 | 4MDCT | 120 | 74 (30) | 1.25 | 5 | 86-96 | 97-100 | NA | NA |
Table 3 Computed tomography protocols for suspected urolithiasis in our institute
CT scanner | GE (64 MDCT) | Siemens (64 MDCT) |
Scan range | Top of kidney-pubic symphysis | Top of kidney-pubic symphysis |
Detector collimation (mm) | 64 × 0.625 | 24 × 1.2 |
Pitch | 1.375 | 1.2 |
Rotation time (s) | 0.5 | 0.5 |
Kvp | 120 | 120 |
mA | 150-450 | Reference mA = 160 |
Noise index | 25 (30 if follow-up exam) | |
Kernel | Standard | B31F |
Reconstruction mode | Plus | |
Slice thickness (mm) | 5 (2.5) | 5 (2.5) |
Slice overlap | 5 (2.5) | 5 (2.5) |
Table 4 Radiation dose and computed tomography scanning parameters of computed tomography urography using standard dose and low dose protocols
Authors | Yr | CT scanner | Acquisiton phase | kVp | mA (mAs) | Pitch | Effective dose (mSv) | Supplement |
Standard CT urographic protocols | ||||||||
Caoili et al[26] | 2002 | 4MDCT | Unenhanced | 120 | 150-240 | 0.75 | 25-35 | |
Nephrographic | 100-280 | 0.75 | ||||||
Excretory | 150-280 | 1.5 | ||||||
Nawfel et al[25] | 2004 | 4MDCT | Unenhanced | 120 | (155-200) | 1.0-1.25 | 6.4 ± 1.3 | |
Nephrographic | (155-200) | 1.0-1.25 | 2.5 ± 0.34 | |||||
Excretory | (165-185) | 0.65-1.0 | 5.9 ± 1.5 | |||||
Low dose CT urographic protocols | ||||||||
Coppenrath et al[27] | 2006 | 4MDCT | Excretory | 90 | (15-100) | 0.875-1.75 | 0.78 (male)/1.08 (female) | |
16MDCT | 100 | (17-100) | 1-1.5 | 1.06-1.19 (male) | ||||
0.76-0.86 (female) | ||||||||
Kemper et al[28] | 2007 | 4MDCT | Excretory | 120 | (70) | 1.25 | 2.7 (male)/4.1(female) | |
Yanaga et al[29] | 2009 | 40MDCT | Excretory | 80 | (300) | 0.781 | 2.9 | Adaptive noise reduction filter |
Kekelidze et al[30] | 2010 | 16MDCT | Unenhanced | 120 | (55) | 0.75 | 3.4 | AEC |
Enhanced | (165) | 1.25 | 9.8 | Split-bolus technique |
Table 5 Computed tomography protocols for computed tomography urography in our institute
Non-contrast | Post-contrast1 | |
Scan range | Top of kidney to base of bladder | Top of kidney to base of bladder |
Detector collimation (mm) | 64 × 0.625 | 64 × 0.625 |
Pitch | 1.375 | 1.375 |
kVp | 120 | 120 |
mA | 150-450 | 150-450 |
Noise index | 25 (30 for follow-up exam) | 10 (< 60 kg) |
12.5 (61-90 kg) | ||
15 (> 90 kg) | ||
Table speed (mm/rotation) | 55 | 55 |
Table 6 Radiation dose and computed tomography protocols for renal donors
Author | Yr | CT scanner | Acquisition phase | kVp | mA(mAs) | Pitch | CTDIvol in mGy | DLP in mGy cm | Supplements |
Kim et al[49] | 2003 | 4MDCT | Unenhanced | 120 | 200 | 1.5 | 10.19 | NA | |
Renal CTA | 12.88 | NA | |||||||
Excretory | 10.19 | NA | |||||||
Wintersperger et al[50] | 2005 | 16MDCT | Abdominal CTA | 120 | 400 (200) | 1 | 15.6 | 673.9 | |
100 | 10.0 | 447.0 | |||||||
Sahani et al[45] | 2007 | 16MDCT | Renal CTA | 140 | (210) | 0.94 | 25 ± 3 | NA | AEC |
120 | 17 ± 4 | NA | Using NI of 15 | ||||||
100 | 12 ± 3 | NA | |||||||
Zamboni et al[42] | 2010 | 64MDCT | Low dose 4-phase | 120 | 50-150 | NA | NA | 2021 ± 545 | |
Low dose 3-phase | NA | 1501 ± 418 | AEC | ||||||
Low dose 2-phase | NA | 981 ± 381 | Using NI of 15.86 | ||||||
Low dose 2-phase* | NA | 676 ± 284 |
Table 7 Computed tomography protocols for living renal donors in our institute
Unenhanced | Arterial | Excretory | |
Scan range | Dome of liver-iliac crest | Dome of liver-iliac crest | Top of kidney-iliac crest |
Detector collimation (mm) | 64 × 0.625 | 64 × 0.625 | 64 × 0.625 |
Pitch | 1.375 | 1.375 | 1.375 |
kVp | 120 | 120 | 100 |
mA | 150-450 | 150-550 (150-800 for patient > 135 kg) | 150-450 |
Noise index | 20 | 28 (< 60 kg) | 18 |
32 (61-90 kg) | |||
35 (> 90 kg) | |||
Table speed (mm/rotation) | 55 | 55 | 55 |
- Citation: Sung MK, Singh S, Kalra MK. Current status of low dose multi-detector CT in the urinary tract. World J Radiol 2011; 3(11): 256-265
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1949-8470/full/v3/i11/256.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v3.i11.256