Can Doppler ultrasonography twinkling artifact be used as an alternative imaging modality to non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography in patients with ureteral stones? A prospective clinical study

Şen, Volkan; İmamoğlu, Çetin; Küçüktürkmen, İbrahim; Değirmenci, Tansu; Bozkurt, İbrahim Halil; Yonguç, Tarık; Aydoğdu, Özgü; Günlüsoy, Bülent

doi:10.1007/s00240-016-0891-8

Cited by 14 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Since this artifact depends on the parameters of the device and the frequency of the ultrasound emission,[22] in this study, the settings and parameters of the device were similar in all of the patients. In the present study, there was a significant positive relationship between twinkling artifact and the size of kidney stone.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

An investigation into the clinical accuracy of twinkling artifacts in patients with urolithiasis smaller than 5 mm in comparison with computed tomography scanning

Hanafi

Fakhrizadeh

Jaafaezadeh

2019

J Family Med Prim Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Ultrasound (US) is a non-invasive method used for the diagnosis of urolithiasis. If the size of the stone is <5 mm, it may be difficult to diagnose. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of twinkling artifact (TA) of color Doppler US imaging with unenhanced computed tomography (CT) for detecting urolithiasis <5 mm.Materials and Methods:This prospective study was conducted on 100 patients with suspected renal calculus presented to the emergency room at the Imam Khomeini Hospital of Ahwaz in 2018. The US findings such as posterior acoustic shadowing and TA were examined for their ability to detect urinary stones (greatest diameter ≤5 mm) using CT findings as the gold standard.Results:The mean size of renal stone was 3.43 ± 0.80 mm in CT and 3.49 ± 0.82 mm in color Doppler US. There was no significant difference between CT and color Doppler US report in quantification of urolithiasis sizes (P = 0.603). TA on color Doppler US was detected in 94 (94%) patients while posterior acoustic shadow was detected in 83 (83%) patients (P = 0.004). A significant difference was found between the TA and size of stones (P = 0.036). The sensitivity, accuracy, and positive predictive values of TA for the detection of calculus were 94%, 94%, and 100%, respectively.Conclusion:The results demonstrated that TA on color Doppler US could be a good and safe alternative imaging modality with comparable results with non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography for the sensitive detection of urolithiasis <5 mm.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

An investigation into the clinical accuracy of twinkling artifacts in patients with urolithiasis smaller than 5 mm in comparison with computed tomography scanning

Hanafi

Fakhrizadeh

Jaafaezadeh

2019

J Family Med Prim Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, because the prevalence and recurrence of renal calculus have increased over time, many patients are subjected to repeated CT scanning for the detection of small stones, and experience a risk of radiation-related adverse effects [12][13][14]. Thus, as an economic and safe diagnostic tool, ultrasound plays an increasingly important role in the diagnosis of acute renal colic [15]. Recent studies reported that for the diagnosis of urolithiasis, ultrasound has a sensitivity of 90-93% and a specificity of 95-100% [8].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sonographic twinkling artifact for diagnosis of acute ureteral calculus

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective We compared the performance of color Doppler twinkling artifacts with B-ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) for diagnosis of ureteral calculus in patients with acute renal colic. Methods The location and size of ureteral stones in 2268 patients with acute renal colic were determined using the two ultrasound methods and CT. All cases were followed up for 2-8 weeks. Results Color Doppler twinkling artifacts had a sensitivity of 96.98%, specificity of 90.39%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 99.77%, and negative predictive value (NPV) of 41.23%. B-Ultrasound had a sensitivity of 96.39%, specificity of 80.77%, PPV of 99.53%, and NPV of 34.43%. CT had a sensitivity of 99.59%, specificity of 94.23%, PPV of 99.86%, and NPV of 84.48%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.925 for color Doppler twinkling artifacts, 0.863 for B-ultrasound, and 0.963 for CT. Conclusion For the diagnosis of ureteral calculus, the sonographic twinkling artifact had a similar performance as CT. We suggest use of the sonographic twinkling artifact instead of CT for patients with acute renal colic to reduce the examination time and exposure to radiation, and to provide earlier access to treatment.

show abstract

“…Сопоставление результатов ультразвуковых доплеровских исследований с данными бесконтрастной КТ позволило многим исследователям определить показатели эффективности выявления АМ для диаг ностики нефролитиаза. Так, АМ был выяв лен у 86,8% пациентов, у которых он был зафиксирован при бесконтрастной КТ [59].…”

Section: определение возможностей использования артефакта мерцания дл...unclassified

Doppler twinkling artifact: physical mechanisms and place in diagnostic practice. State of the art

Громов

Sapozhnikov²,

Каприн

2022

Medicinskaâ vizualizaciâ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The twinkling artifact has been known to specialists in ultrasound diagnostics since 1996. However, until now there is no understanding of the reasons for its appearance, and the place of its application in diagnostics.Material and methods. Electronic databases (PubMed, E-library, Web of Science) were searched studies using the keyword – “twinkling artifact”. The scientific publications on the Doppler twinkling artifact from the moment of the first reports about its existence is systematized and analyzed. The authors' own developments on this topic are presented. Modern views on this phenomenon and its place in ultrasound diagnostics are described. An explanation of the physical mechanisms of this phenomenon is given.Results. Recommendations are formulated for practitioners on changing the settings of an ultrasound scanner in order to increase twinkling artifact detectability. The directions of using the artifact to obtain additional diagnostic signs of pathological changes, which currently include the diagnosis of nephro-, uretero- and choledocholithiasis, are determined.Conclusions. The high efficiency of the use of the twinkling artifact for the diagnosis of small kidney stones, comparable with the capabilities of computed tomography, has been shown.

show abstract

Can Doppler ultrasonography twinkling artifact be used as an alternative imaging modality to non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography in patients with ureteral stones? A prospective clinical study

Cited by 14 publications

References 28 publications

An investigation into the clinical accuracy of twinkling artifacts in patients with urolithiasis smaller than 5 mm in comparison with computed tomography scanning

An investigation into the clinical accuracy of twinkling artifacts in patients with urolithiasis smaller than 5 mm in comparison with computed tomography scanning

Sonographic twinkling artifact for diagnosis of acute ureteral calculus

Doppler twinkling artifact: physical mechanisms and place in diagnostic practice. State of the art

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About