American Journal of Roentgenology, volume 206, issue 2, pages 326-331
Clinical Effectiveness of Prospectively Reported Sonographic Twinkling Artifact for the Diagnosis of Renal Calculus in Patients Without Known Urolithiasis.
William R. Masch
1
,
RICHARD H. COHAN
1, 2
,
James James M. Ellis
1, 2
,
Jonathan R. Dillman
1, 3
,
Jonathan M. Rubin
1, 2
,
Matthew S. Davenport
1, 2, 4
4
Michigan Radiology Quality Collaborative, Ann Arbor, MI.
|
Publication type: Journal Article
Publication date: 2016-01-21
Journal:
American Journal of Roentgenology
scimago Q1
SJR: 1.235
CiteScore: 12.8
Impact factor: 4.7
ISSN: 0361803X, 15463141
PubMed ID:
26797359
General Medicine
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical effectiveness of prospectively reported sonographic twinkling artifact for the diagnosis of renal calculus in patients without known urolithiasis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
All ultrasound reports finalized in one health system from June 15, 2011, to June 14, 2014, that contained the words "twinkle" or "twinkling" in reference to suspected renal calculus were identified. Patients with known urolithiasis or lack of a suitable reference standard (unenhanced abdominal CT with ≤ 2.5-mm slice thickness performed ≤ 30 days after ultrasound) were excluded. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive likelihood ratio of sonographic twinkling artifact for the diagnosis of renal calculus were calculated by renal unit and stratified by two additional diagnostic features for calcification (echogenic focus, posterior acoustic shadowing).
RESULTS
Eighty-five patients formed the study population. Isolated sonographic twinkling artifact had sensitivity of 0.78 (82/105), specificity of 0.40 (26/65), and a positive likelihood ratio of 1.30 for the diagnosis of renal calculus. Specificity and positive likelihood ratio improved and sensitivity declined when the following additional diagnostic features were present: sonographic twinkling artifact and echogenic focus (sensitivity, 0.61 [64/105]; specificity, 0.65 [42/65]; positive likelihood ratio, 1.72); sonographic twinkling artifact and posterior acoustic shadowing (sensitivity, 0.31 [33/105]; specificity, 0.95 [62/65]; positive likelihood ratio, 6.81); all three features (sensitivity, 0.31 [33/105]; specificity, 0.95 [62/65]; positive likelihood ratio, 6.81).
CONCLUSION
Isolated sonographic twinkling artifact has a high false-positive rate (60%) for the diagnosis of renal calculus in patients without known urolithiasis.
Found
Are you a researcher?
Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.