Role of Posterior Acoustic Shadow Width in Ultrasound in Determining Stone Size in Urolithiasis.
| Autor: | Javid M; Urology, Chengalpattu Medical College, Chengalpattu, IND., Ilangovan AK; Urology, Chengalpattu Medical College, Chengalpattu, IND., Ganapathy R; Urology, Chengalpattu Medical College, Chengalpattu, IND., Sivalingam S; Urology, Chengalpattu Medical College, Chengalpattu, IND., Selvaraj S; Urology, Chengalpattu Medical College, Chengalpattu, IND., Prasad S; Urology, Chengalpattu Medical College, Chengalpattu, IND., Elumalai P; Urology, Chengalpattu Medical College, Chengalpattu, IND. |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Zdroj: | Cureus [Cureus] 2023 Nov 22; Vol. 15 (11), pp. e49254. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 Nov 22 (Print Publication: 2023). |
| DOI: | 10.7759/cureus.49254 |
| Abstrakt: | Introduction Ultrasound (US) is frequently the initial diagnostic tool for urolithiasis, though computed tomography (CT) remains the imaging modality of choice. However, due to potential overestimations, the accuracy of US in gauging stone size has been a point of contention. This study aims to compare the accuracy of stone size measurements in US, specifically evaluating the utility of the posterior acoustic shadow (PAS) width, against the CT measurements. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study where 120 adult patients (aged >18 years) with confirmed urolithiasis through CT participated. Stone sizes were assessed via both CT and US, with the PAS width also being measured in the latter. Statistical analysis compared stone size discrepancies between both CT and US measurement techniques. Results The study enrolled 73 males and 47 females with various stone locations. The average stone sizes were 15.93 ± 4.59 mm (CT), 18.60 ± 4.80 mm (US), and 16.69 ± 4.61 mm (PAS width). There was a mean difference of 2.67 mm (p < 0.0001) between CT and US sizes, whereas the difference between the PAS width and CT sizes was only 0.75 mm (p = 0.203). Stone size miscalculation by US was 16.77%, whereas it was only 4.77% for PAS width. Conclusion US tends to significantly overestimate stone size when compared to CT. Conversely, the measurement of the PAS width in US presents a more aligned estimation to CT outputs. Integrating PAS width into routine US reporting can enhance the accuracy of stone size estimation, optimizing urolithiasis management and patient counseling. Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. (Copyright © 2023, Javid et al.) |
| Databáze: | MEDLINE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|