BJU international · 2016
Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography urography and visual assessment during ureterorenoscopy in upper tract urothelial carcinoma.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Grahn Alexandra, Melle-Hannah Miden, Malm Camilla, Jäderling Fredrik, Radecka Eva, Beckman Mats, Brehmer Marianne
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate diagnostic accuracy of multiphase computed tomography urography (MCTU) and visual assessment at ureterorenoscopy (URS) for detection of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC).
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients referred to our tertiary care centre were included in a prospective study covering the period 2005 to 2012. The patients underwent initial imaging and URS with focal samples taken. Cytopathological results served as reference standard.
RESULTS: We investigated 174 renal units (RUs; renal pelvis and adjacent ureter) in 148 patients. UTUC was found in 104 RUs. MCTU had an accuracy of 0.74, sensitivity of 0.89, specificity of 0.51, positive predictive value of 0.73, and negative predictive value of 0.75; corresponding values for URS were 0.84, 0.84, 0.85, 0.89, and 0.78, respectively. MCTU had significantly higher sensitivity and accuracy compared with other imaging techniques (P<0.05). Compared with MCTU, URS had similar sensitivity but significantly greater specificity and accuracy.
CONCLUSION: Both MCTU and URS are important tools in the diagnostic evaluation of UTUC although neither of those techniques achieves 100% accuracy. MCTU should be chosen as the radiographical method if there are no contraindications and URS should always be combined with focal cytology and biopsies of suspicious lesions. To enhance diagnostic precision both MCTU and URS with focal samples should be included in the diagnostic procedure. The present results add impact to current diagnostic guidelines.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients referred to our tertiary care centre were included in a prospective study covering the period 2005 to 2012. The patients underwent initial imaging and URS with focal samples taken. Cytopathological results served as reference standard.
RESULTS: We investigated 174 renal units (RUs; renal pelvis and adjacent ureter) in 148 patients. UTUC was found in 104 RUs. MCTU had an accuracy of 0.74, sensitivity of 0.89, specificity of 0.51, positive predictive value of 0.73, and negative predictive value of 0.75; corresponding values for URS were 0.84, 0.84, 0.85, 0.89, and 0.78, respectively. MCTU had significantly higher sensitivity and accuracy compared with other imaging techniques (P<0.05). Compared with MCTU, URS had similar sensitivity but significantly greater specificity and accuracy.
CONCLUSION: Both MCTU and URS are important tools in the diagnostic evaluation of UTUC although neither of those techniques achieves 100% accuracy. MCTU should be chosen as the radiographical method if there are no contraindications and URS should always be combined with focal cytology and biopsies of suspicious lesions. To enhance diagnostic precision both MCTU and URS with focal samples should be included in the diagnostic procedure. The present results add impact to current diagnostic guidelines.