Radiologic evaluation of children prior to SWL: to what extent they are exposed to radiation?

  • Bilal Eryildirim
  • Ozlem Turkoglu
  • Cemal Goktas
  • Ovunc Kavukoglu
  • Rasim Guzel
  • Kemal Sarica
Original Paper

Abstract

The objective of this study is to evaluate the average radiation exposure in children with renal stones before SWL treatment. Mean radiation exposure values were evaluated in 110 children before SWL treatment. While some children referred to the emergency department (ED) with colic pain, remaining cases referred to outpatient department (OD). Although low-dose NCCT was performed in ED; KUB and abdominal sonography were first performed in other cases referring to OD where CT has been applied if needed. The type of imaging modality used and the mean radiation exposure were evaluated and comparatively evaluated with respect to the department referred, patient as well as stone related parameters. 49 children referred to ED and 61 children referred to OD. Mean stone size was 7.24 ± 0.29 mm. 62 cases had opaque stones. Mean radiation exposure values were higher in children referring to ED than the other cases. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the mean number of KUB, IVU and sonographic evaluation performed prior to SWL management. There was a significant correlation between the mean radiation exposure and the stone size as well degree of hydonephrosis in a positive manner. Although a significant correlation was present between the mean radiation exposure and stone opacity in a negative manner; there was no correlation with respect to the other related parameters. Unnecessary use of X-ray based imaging modalities in children could be effectively avoided using KUB and US combination beginning from the diagnostic phase of stone disease.

Keywords

Radiation Children Shock wave lithotripsy Renal stones 

Abbreviations

ALARA

As low as reasonably achievable

CT

Computed tomography

ED

Emergency department

HU

Hounsfield unit

IVU

Intravenous urography

ICRP

International Commission on Radiological Protection

KUB

Kidney-ureter-bladder

mSv

millisievert

NCCT

Noncontrast computed tomography

OD

Outpatient department

SWL

Shock wave lithotripsy

UTI

Urinary tract infection

USG

Ultrasonography

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

This study was not funded by any institution.

Conflict of interest

Bilal Eryildirim, Ozlem Turkoglu, Cemal Goktas, Ovunc Kavukoglu, Rasim Guzel and Kemal Sarica declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.

References

  1. 1.
    Sarica K (2008) Medical aspect and minimal invasive treatment of urinary stones in children. Arch Ital Urol Androl 80:43–49PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kroovand RL (1997) Pediatric urolithiasis. Urol Clin North Am 24:173–184CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Minevich E (2001) Pediatric urolithiasis. Pediatr Clin North Am 48:1571–1585CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Erbagcı A, Erbagcı BA, Yılmaz M et al (2003) Pediatric urolithiasis. Scand J Urol Nephrol 37:127–133Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Koyuncu H, Yencilek F, Erturhan S et al (2011) Clinical course of pediatric urolithiasis: follow-up data in a long-term basis. Int Urol Nephrol 43:7–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Thalgott M, Kurtz F, Gschwend JE et al (2015) Diagnostic imaging of urolithiais. Current recommendations and new developments. Urologe Ausg A 54:948–955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Preston DL, Cullings H, Suyama A et al (2008) Solid cancer incidence in atomic bomb survivors exposed in utero or as young children. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:428CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Katz DS, Scheer M, Lumerman JH et al (2000) Alternative or additional diagnoses on unenhanced helical computed tomography for suspected renal colic: experience with 1000 consecutive examinations. Urology 56:53–57CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hernanz-Schulman M, Goske MJ, Bercha IH et al (2011) Pause and pulse: ten steps that help manage radiation dose during pediatric fluoroscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197:475CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Strauss KJ, Kaste SC (2006) The ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) concept in pediatric interventional and fluoroscopic imaging: striving to keep radiation doses as low as possible during fluoroscopy of pediatric patients—a white paper executive summary. Radiology 240:621CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hyams ES, Shah O (2010) Evaluation and follow-up of patients with urinary lithiasis: minimizing radiation exposure. Curr Urol Rep 11:80–86CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Johnson PB, Bahadori AA, Eckerman KF et al (2011) Response functions for computing absorbed dose to skeletal tissues from photon irradiation—an update. Phys Med Biol 56:2347–2365CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee C, Lodwick D, Hurtado J et al (2010) The UF family of reference hybrid phantoms for computational radiation dosimetry. Phys Med Biol 55:339–363CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection 2007 (2007) ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP 37:1–332Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gkanatsios NA, Huda W (1997) Computation of energy imparted in diagnostic radiology. Med Phys 24:571–579CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Faerber GJ (2001) Pediatric urolithiasis. Urology 11:385–389Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Spivacow FR, Negri AL, del Valle EE et al (2008) Metabolic risk factors in children with kidney stone disease. Pediatr Nephrol 23:1129–1133CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pietrow PK, Pope JC, Adams MC et al (2002) Clinical outcome of pediatric stone disease. J Urol 167:670–673CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Milliner DS, Murphy ME (1993) Urolithiasis in pediatric patients. Mayo Clin Proc 68:241–244CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Noe HN (2000) Hypercalciuria and pediatric stone recurrences with and without structural abnormalities. J Urol 164:1094–1096CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kluner C, Hein PA, Gralla O et al (2006) Does ultra-low-dose CT with a radiation dose equivalent to that of KUB suffice to detect renal and ureteral calculi? J Comput Assist Tomogr 30:44–50CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ripolles T, Agramunt M, Errando J et al (2004) Suspected ureteral colic: plain film and sonography vs unenhanced helical CT. A prospective study in 66 patients. Eur Radiol 14:129–136CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Strauss KJ, Goske MJ (2011) Estimated pediatric radiation dose during CT. Pediatr Radiol 41:472–482CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ripolles T, Martinez-Perez MJ, Vizuete J et al (2013) Sonographic diagnosis of symptomatic ureteral calculi: usefulness of the twinkling artifact. Abdom Imaging 38:863–869CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pepe P, Motta L, Pennisi M et al (2005) Functional evaluation of the urinary tract by color-Doppler ultrasonography (CDU) in 100 patients with renal colic. Eur J Radiol 53:131–135CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jandaghi AB, Falahatkar S, Alizadeh A et al (2013) Assessment of ureterovesical jet dynamics in obstructed ureter by urinary stone with color Doppler and duplex Doppler examinations. Urolithiasis 41:159–163CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bilal Eryildirim
    • 1
  • Ozlem Turkoglu
    • 2
  • Cemal Goktas
    • 1
  • Ovunc Kavukoglu
    • 1
  • Rasim Guzel
    • 3
  • Kemal Sarica
    • 1
  1. 1.Lutfi Kirdar Training and Research HospitalUrology ClinicIstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Lutfi Kirdar Training and Research HospitalRadiology ClinicIstanbulTurkey
  3. 3.Medistate Hospital Urology DepartmentIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations