Rationale use of unenhanced multi-detector CT (CT KUB) in evaluation of suspected renal colic.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the yield of non-contrast enhanced CT (CT KUB) across different ordering specialties and need of developing an algorithm for its rationale use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 1550 consecutive CT KUB studies requested for suspected renal colic carried out at a single institution in a calendar year. The data was analyzed for demographic characteristics, referring clinician and final diagnosis. Only patients with CT as primary imaging for clinically suspected reno-ureteral colic were included. Departments ordering these CT KUB examinations were divided into three divisions: Urologist, emergency room (ER) physician and others. RESULTS: Of 1550 CT KUB performed in the study period 766 met the inclusion criteria. Urologists (57%), followed by ER physicians (30%) mostly ordered the examination. The overall positive yield for urolithiasis was 64% (n = 490), rate of incidental/alternate findings was 15% (n = 116) and 21% (n = 160) were negative. Urologist has the highest positive yield of 67.4% (n = 295) followed by ER physician 67% (n = 152) and others 42.5% (n = 43); p < 0.001. Rate of incidental/alternate findings was highest in CT ordered by other specialties 23.7% (n = 24) followed by ER physician 17.6% (n = 40) and urologist 11.8% (n = 52); p = 0.005. CONCLUSION: There is statistically significant difference of yield across specialties. CT KUB as an initial imaging modality for suspected urolithiasis should be ordered in consultation with the urologist and ER physicians. Tool of good history taking and physical examination has proved to be essential steps in algorithm of ordering CT KUB, which can avoid unnecessary radiation exposure.

Current understanding of treatment and management protocol for adult diabetic in-patients at a tertiary care hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the current understanding of treatment and management protocols for adult diabetic inpatients at a tertiary care hospital. METHODS: This cross-sectional study, conducted at the Civil Hospital Karachi from July to September 2009, involved 450 participants, who were interviewed through a well-structured questionnaire regarding the patient's demography, clinical features, past medical history, type of diabetes mellitus, duration, associated complications, and also involved patient notes for laboratory tests and management. SPSSv15.0 was used for descriptive analysis. RESULTS: The study population of 450 diabetics had 144 (32%) males and 306 (68%) females. Of the total, 435 (96.7%) patients had type 2 diabetes. There were 231 (51%) patients using insulin, 168 (37.3%) oral hypoglycaemic drugs, and 51 (11.3%) using both. Among patients using insulin, regular insulin usage stood at 30% followed by a combination of regular insulin and NPH (26.7%) and NPH alone at 6%. The most popular drug used was metformin (27.3%) and the least used drug was glitazones (4%). In the study population, 73.3% patients controlled their diabetes with diet, and 24.7% with regular exercise. CONCLUSION: Majority of the study population had type 2 diabetes with a female preponderance. Insulin was prescribed for half the patients. Metformin was the most frequently used oral hypoglycaemic drug.