THE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF RADIOLOGIC IMAGING IN SUSPECTED RENAL COLIC
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/1q9s5a78Keywords:
Ureterolithiasis, renal colic, diagnostic imaging, acute settingAbstract
Background: Renal colic, a common cause of morbidity, is characterized by acute, intermittent flank pain. Diagnosis involves a combination of history, physical exam, laboratory testing, and imaging studies. In recent years, the assessment of individuals suspected of having renal colic has become increasingly dependent on imaging. Renal ultrasound is not reliable for seeing ureteral calculi and may miss smaller stones. Besides, the use of CT increased radiation exposure and high medical costs.
The aim: This study aims to determine the radiologic imaging in patients with suspected renal colic. Methods: By comparing itself to the standards set by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020, this study was able to show that it met all of the requirements. So, the experts were able to make sure that the study was as up-to-date as it was possible to be. For this search approach, publications that came out between 2014 and 2024 were taken into account. Several different online reference sources, like PubMed and ScienceDirect, were used to do this. It was decided not to take into account review pieces, works that had already been published, or works that were only half done.
Results: In the PubMed database, the results of our search brought up 162 articles, whereas the results of our search on ScienceDirect brought up 135 articles. The results of the search conducted by title screening yielded a total 25 articles for PubMed and 15 articles for ScienceDirect. We compiled a total of 21 papers, 17 of which came from PubMed and 4 of which came from ScienceDirect. We excluded 2 review articles, 4 duplicate articles, 1 non-full text article, 1 article having ineligible subject and 4 articles having insufficient outcomes data. In the end, we included nine research that met the criteria.
Conclusion: The use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in patients with suspected renal colic may avoid the use of CT. Although, the accuracy is lower than CT, but it can reduce medical expense and induced radiation exposure.
References
Gandhi A, Hashemzeh T, Batura D. The management of acute renal colic. 2019.
Thia I, Saluja M. An update on management of renal colic. Vol. 11, International Journal of Emergency Medicine. Springer London; 2021.
Torabi M, Shojaee F, Mirzaee M. Prevalence of Renal Colic in the Emergency Departments: A Multi-center Study. Hosp Pract Res. 2021 Aug 1;6(3):123–6.
Alabousi A, Patlas MN, Mellnick VM, Chernyak V, Farshait N, Katz DS. Renal Colic Imaging: Myths, Recent Trends, and Controversies. Vol. 70, Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal. Canadian Medical Association; 2019. p. 164–71.
Patti L, Leslie SW. Acute Renal Colic [Internet]. 2022. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK431091/
Al-Balushi A, Al-Shibli A, Al-Reesi A, Ullah QZ, Al-Shukaili W, Baawain S, et al. The Accuracy of Point-of-Care Ultrasound Performed by Emergency Physicians in Detecting Hydronephrosis in Patients with Renal Colic. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2022 Aug 1;22(3):351–6.
Blecher G, Meek R, Egerton-Warburton Di, McCahy P. Introduction of a new imaging guideline for suspected renal colic in the ED reduces CT urography utilisation. Emergency Medicine Journal. 2017 Nov 1;34(11):749–54.
Bourcier JE, Gallard E, Redonnet JP, Abillard M, Billaut Q, Fauque L, et al. Ultrasound at the patient’s bedside for the diagnosis and prognostication of a renal colic. Ultrasound Journal. 2021 Dec 1;13(1).
Kepka S, Zarca K, Ohana M, Hoffmann A, Muller J, Le Borgne P, et al. A Real-World Cost-Effectiveness Study Evaluating Imaging Strategies for the Diagnostic Workup of Renal Colic in the Emergency Department. Medicina (Lithuania). 2023 Mar 1;59(3).
Kim SG, Jo IJ, Kim T, Hwang SY, Park JH, Shin TG, et al. Usefulness of protocolized point-of-care ultrasonography for patients with acute renal colic who visited emergency department: A randomized controlled study. Medicina (Lithuania). 2019 Nov 1;55(11).
Ng C, Tsung JW. Avoiding computed tomography scans by using point-of-care ultrasound when evaluating suspected pediatric renal colic. Journal of Emergency Medicine. 2015 Aug 1;49(2):165–71.
Roberts MJ, Williams J, Khadra S, Nalavenkata S, Kam J, McCombie SP, et al. A prospective, matched comparison of ultra-low and standard-dose computed tomography for assessment of renal colic. BJU Int. 2020 Sep 1;126(S1):27–32.
Shrestha R, Bista Y, Khan A. Current Diagnostic Approach and Initial Treatment Patterns for Renal Colic in Emergency Department. Vol. 15, JNHRC. 2017.
Sibley S, Roth N, Scott C, Rang L, White H, Sivilotti MLA, et al. Point-of-care ultrasound for the detection of hydronephrosis in emergency department patients with suspected renal colic. Ultrasound Journal. 2020 Dec 1;12(1).
Nicolau C, Claudon M, Derchi LE, Adam EJ, Nielsen MB, Mostbeck G, et al. Imaging patients with renal colic—consider ultrasound first. Vol. 6, Insights into Imaging. Springer Verlag; 2015. p. 441–7.
Smith-Bindman R, Aubin C, Bailitz J, Bengiamin RN, Camargo CA, Corbo J, et al. Ultrasonography versus Computed Tomography for Suspected Nephrolithiasis. New England Journal of Medicine. 2014 Sep 18;371(12):1100–10.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Advanced Research in Medical and Health Science (ISSN 2208-2425)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Licensing
Ninety Nine Publication publishes articles under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This licensing allows for any use of the work, provided the original author(s) and source are credited, thereby facilitating the free exchange and use of research for the advancement of knowledge.
Detailed Licensing Terms
Attribution (BY): Users must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. Users may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses them or their use.
No Additional Restrictions: Users may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
