Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online before print April 15, 2008, 10.1148/radiol.2473070965

(Radiology 2008;247:747.)

A more recent version of this article appeared on June 1, 2008
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
2473070965v1
247/3/747    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kim, S.
Right arrow Articles by Bae, K. T.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kim, S.
Right arrow Articles by Bae, K. T.
© RSNA, 2008

Genitourinary Imaging

Opacification of Urinary Bladder and Ureter at CT Urography: Effect of a Log-rolling Procedure and Postvoiding Residual Bladder Urine Volume1

Sooah Kim, MD 2, Lihuan L. Wang, MD, Jay P. Heiken, MD, Cary L. Siegel, MD, Charles F. Hildebolt, DDS, PhD, and Kyongtae T. Bae, MD, PhD

1 From Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo. From the 2006 RSNA Annual Meeting. Received June 8, 2007; revision requested August 13; revision received September 18; accepted October 16; final version accepted November 13. Address correspondence to K.T.B., Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 200 Lothrop St, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 (e-mail: baek{at}upmc.edu).

Purpose: To retrospectively evaluate the effect of a log-rolling procedure and postvoiding residual (PVR) bladder urine volume on opacification of urinary bladder and ureters at multi–detector row computed tomographic (CT) urography.

Materials and Methods: Institutional review board approval was obtained, and informed consent was waived for this retrospective HIPAA-compliant study. Triple-phase 16– or 64–detector row CT urographic images in 166 patients (88 men, 78 women; mean age, 58.9 years; range, 22–89 years) were evaluated retrospectively. Immediately prior to excretory phase scanning, 67 patients did and 99 did not undergo a log-rolling procedure on the CT table. PVR bladder urine volume was quantified as the largest cross-sectional area of the bladder measured on unenhanced images (PVR values). The degree of bladder opacification was quantified as the percentage of the total cross-sectional area of the bladder that was opacified on excretory phase images. Ureteral opacification was quantified as the percentage of ureteral length that contained enhanced urine. On the basis of PVR values, patients were stratified into four subgroups (≤2000, >2000 to ≤3000, >3000 to ≤4000, and >4000 mm2). The Wilcoxon rank sum and Student t tests were used to evaluate differences.

Results: Median degree of bladder opacification of the log-rolling versus non–log-rolling group was 100% versus 78% for PVR values of 2000 mm2 or less (P < .01), 99% versus 79% for PVR values of more than 2000 to 3000 mm2 or less (P = .01), 89% versus 79% for PVR values of more than 3000 to 4000 mm2 or less (P < .05), and 64% versus 69% for PVR values of more than 4000 mm2 (P = .96). There was no significant difference between ureteral opacification and log rolling or between bladder and ureteral opacification (P > .05).

Conclusion: Use of a log-rolling procedure prior to excretory phase CT urography increases the percentage of bladder opacification in patients with PVR values of 4000 mm2 or less. No difference in ureteral opacification was observed between the log-rolling and non–log-rolling groups.

© RSNA, 2008







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2008 by the Radiological Society of North America.