Contrast-induced nephropathy in outpatients with preexisting renal impairment: a comparison between intravenous iohexol and iodixanol.

BACKGROUND: Concern for contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) may result in administration of more costly agents. We prospectively compared outpatient CIN incidence of iodixanol to iohexol. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive 100ml of iohexol (n=47) or iodixanol (n=55). We compared patients who developed CIN using the Wilson score interval and also calculated an odds ratio for the development of CIN. RESULTS: CIN rate for iohexol was 2% compared to 9% for iodixanol. Those receiving iodixanol were almost 5 times more likely to experience CIN. CONCLUSION: These results do not suggest a benefit of iodixanol over iohexol in the study population.

In vivo comparison of radiation exposure of dual-energy CT versus low-dose CT versus standard CT for imaging urinary calculi.

PURPOSE: Dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) is an emerging imaging modality with the unique capability of determining urinary stone composition. This study compares radiation exposure of DECT, standard single-energy CT (SECT), and low-dose renal stone protocol single-energy CT (LDSECT) for the evaluation of nephrolithiasis in a single in vivo patient cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following institutional review board (IRB) approval, we retrospectively reviewed 200 consecutive DECT examinations performed on patients with suspected urolithiasis over a 6-month period. Of these, 35 patients had undergone examination with our LDSECT protocol, and 30 patients had undergone examination of the abdomen and pelvis with our SECT imaging protocol within 2 years of the DECT examination. The CT dose index volume (CTDIvol) was used to compare radiation exposure between scans. Image quality was objectively evaluated by comparing image noise. Statistical evaluation was performed using a Student's t-test. RESULTS: DECT performed at 80/140 kVp and 100/140 kVp did not produce a significant difference in radiation exposure compared with LDSECT (p=0.09 and 0.18, respectively). DECT performed at 80/140 kVp and 100/140 kVp produced an average 40% and 31%, respectively, reduction in radiation exposure compared with SECT (p<0.001). For patients imaged with the 100/140 kVp protocol, average values for images noise were higher in the LDSECT images compared with DECT images (p<0.001) and there was no significant difference in image noise between DECT and SECT images in the same patient (p=0.88). Patients imaged with the 80/140 kVp protocol had equivocal image noise compared with LDSECT images (p=0.44), however, DECT images had greater noise compared with SECT images in the same patient (p<0.001). Of the 75 patients included in the study, stone material was available for 16; DECT analysis correctly predicted stone composition in 15/16 patients (93%). CONCLUSION: DECT provides knowledge of stone composition in addition to the anatomic information provided by LDSECT/SECT without increasing patient radiation exposure and with minimal impact on image noise.

Characterization of ureteral stents by dual-energy computed tomography: Clinical implications.

Dual-energy computed-tomography (DECT) has been suggested as the method of choice for imaging urinary calculi due to the modality's high sensitivity for detecting stones and its capability of accurately differentiating between uric-acid (UA) and non-UA (predominantly calcium) stones. The clinical significance of the latter feature relates to the differences in management of UA vs non-UA calculi. Like calculi, ureteral stents are assigned color by the dual-energy post-processing algorithm, which may lead to improved or worsened stone visualization based on the resulting stent/stone contrast. Herein we depict the case of a nephrolithiasis patient with bilateral stents, each with different color, clearly displaying the effect of stent color on stone visualization. Further, three-dimensional reconstruction of the DECT images illustrates advantages of this enhancement compared to conventional two-dimensional computed tomography. The resulting stent/stone contrast produces an unanticipated potential advantage of DECT in patients with urolithiasis and stents and may promote improved management decision-making.

Accuracy and efficiency of determining urinary calculi composition using dual-energy computed tomography compared with Hounsfield unit measurements for practicing physicians.

OBJECTIVE: To compare speed and accuracy for determining urinary calculi composition between dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) and Hounsfield unit (HU) measurements of calculi by a set of reviewers at varying levels of training and practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen patients with known stone composition were randomly selected. Fourteen reviewers of varying levels of practice interpreted DECT and HU images from the selected patients to predict stone composition in 2 sessions (day 1: tutorial or flow sheet available for image interpretation and day 2: tutorial or flow sheet not available). Reviewers recorded HU values, stone color, and predicted stone composition as they were timed. Accuracy of image interpretation, determination of calculi composition, and interpretation time were compared. RESULTS: DECT accuracy: image interpretation 100% (day 1) and 94% (day 2); predicted stone composition: 100% (day 1) and 73% (day 2). Mean interpretation time was the same for both days, 21 seconds per study (range, 11-40 seconds). HU accuracy: image interpretation 97% (day 1) and 91% (day 2); predicted stone composition was 45% accurate on both days. Mean interpretation time was 53 seconds per study (range, 28-79 seconds) and 41 seconds per study (range, 19-71 seconds) on days 1 and 2, respectively. Overall accuracy of determination of stone composition and interpretation time for DECT were essentially double those of the HU images (87% vs 45% and 21 vs 47 seconds, respectively). Reviewer's experience level did not affect accuracy or speed. CONCLUSION: DECT is easier to learn, faster to interpret, and more accurate than HU in determining urinary calculi composition for physicians at various levels of training and practice.

Case series demonstrating the clinical utility of dual energy computed tomography in patients requiring stents for urinary calculi.

Dual energy computed tomography (DECT) utilizes the material change in attenuation when imaged at two different energies to determine the composition of urinary calculi as uric acid or non-uric acid. We discuss a series of case reports illustrating DECT's ability to provide immediate determination of uric acid versus non-uric acid calculi and facilitate more informed clinical decision-making. Further, these cases demonstrate a unique population of patients with ureteral stents and percutaneous nephrostomy tubes that benefit from DECT's ability to create a virtual color contrast between an indwelling device and the stone material and thereby significantly impacting patient morbidity.

Three-dimensional dual-energy computed tomography for enhancing stone/stent contrasting and stone visualization in urolithiasis.

The use of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) for evaluating urinary calculi has been appreciated due to the modality's capability of differentiating between uric acid (UA) and non-UA stones, which are color coded based on a postprocessing algorithm. No other imaging modality or laboratory test is able to identify the stone composition without first attaining the stone material. Knowledge of the stone composition is clinically significant since UA calculi may be treated medically whereas non-UA calculi may require surgical removal. Regardless of the stone type, ureteral stents are often placed to prevent or treat obstruction. Recent work has demonstrated that commonly used stents are also colored based on their dual energy characteristics and may thereby either improve or obscure the identification of adjacent calculi. Herein, we report the case of a 65-year-old man who underwent percutaneous nephrolithotomy of a large staghorn stone with subsequent significant residual stone fragments noted on a follow-up scan. By using three-dimensional DECT and taking advantage of color contrasting, the stone composition, burden, shape, and boundary were clearly depicted apart from the adjacent stent, resulting in successful medical treatment and obviating the need for further surgical intervention.

Determination of ureter stent appearance on dual-energy computed tomography scan.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) properties of 7 commonly used ureteral stents to optimize stent selection for calculi monitored using DECT. The use of DECT to evaluate renal and ureteral calculi has recently increased. METHODS: Seven stents were individually placed in a fish bowl phantom and imaged using a Siemens Somatom Definition Flash CT scanner. DECT peak tube potentials of 80 and 140 kVp and 100 and 140 kVp were used, reflecting our current dual-energy protocols. These were compared to 31 in vivo stents of known composition. The data were reconstructed on a multimodality WorkPlace (Siemens) using CT syngo Post-Processing Suite software. RESULTS: The average patient age was 64 years (range 27-90). The average body mass index was 31.9 kg/m(2) (range 24-51.6). Of the 27 patients, 4 had uric acid stones and 22 had calcium-based stones; 1 patient had undergone renal transplantation. No difference was seen in the dual-energy characterization of stents from the same manufacturer. All imaged Cook and Bard stents had a dual-energy characterization that approached that of calcium stones (blue). All Boston Scientific and Gyrus ACMI stents had a dual-energy characterization resembling that of uric acid stones (red). CONCLUSION: The present study evaluated the stent appearance on DECT for various stent manufacturers. This information will aid in the optimal stent selection for patients undergoing treatment of renal calculi and followed up with DECT.