Accuracy of Unenhanced Computerized Tomography Interpretation by Urologists in Patients with Acute Flank Pain

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridgulpinar, murat tolga/0000-0001-9420-3009
dc.authoridAkbas, Alpaslan/0000-0003-1470-5952
dc.authoridBAYRAK, OMER/0000-0001-5542-1572
dc.contributor.authorSancak, Eyup Burak
dc.contributor.authorResorlu, Mustafa
dc.contributor.authorCelik, Orcun
dc.contributor.authorResorlu, Berkan
dc.contributor.authorGulpinar, Murat Tolga
dc.contributor.authorAkbas, Alpaslan
dc.contributor.authorKarakan, Tolga
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-27T20:24:23Z
dc.date.available2025-01-27T20:24:23Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.departmentÇanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractPurpose: The aim was to compare the findings of non-contrast computerized tomography (NCCT) evaluated by urology specialists with the findings of experienced radiologists, who are accepted as a standard reference for patients who present with acute flank pain. Materials and Methods: Five hundred patients evaluated with NCCT were included in the study. The NCCT images of these patients were evaluated by both radiologists and urology specialists in terms of the presence of calculus, size of calculus, the location of calculus, the presence of hydronephrosis, and pathologies other than calculus, and the results were compared. Results: The evaluations of urology specialists and standard reference radiology specialists are consistent with each other in terms of the presence of calculus (kappa [K]: 0.904), categorical stone size (K: 0.81), the location of calculus (K: 0.88), and hydronephrosis (K: 0.94). However, the evaluations of urology specialists in detecting pathologies other than calculus, which may cause acute flank pain or accompany renal colic, were found to be inadequate (K: 0.37). The false-negative rate of detecting pathologies outside of the urinary system by the urology specialists is calculated as 0.86. Conclusion: Although the urology specialists can evaluate the findings related to calculus sufficiently with NCCT, they may not discover pathologies outside of the urinary system. (C) 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel
dc.identifier.doi10.1159/000370247
dc.identifier.endpage214
dc.identifier.issn0042-1138
dc.identifier.issn1423-0399
dc.identifier.issue2
dc.identifier.pmid25633754
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84924114781
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.startpage210
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1159/000370247
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12428/22195
dc.identifier.volume94
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000350079000015
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherKarger
dc.relation.ispartofUrologia Internationalis
dc.relation.publicationcategoryinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.snmzKA_WoS_20250125
dc.subjectAcute flank pain
dc.subjectComputed tomography
dc.subjectRadiologist
dc.subjectUrologist
dc.titleAccuracy of Unenhanced Computerized Tomography Interpretation by Urologists in Patients with Acute Flank Pain
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu