Comparison Between Photofluorography and Standard Fluoroscopic Voiding Cystourethrography in Evaluating Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children With Urinary Tract Infection

Radiology Department, Dr Sheikh Children Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, IR Iran.
Nephro-urology monthly 06/2012; 4(3):541-4. DOI: 10.5812/numonthly.3562
Source: PubMed


Imaging of the urinary system is considered to be responsible for significant radiation in children.
This study was conducted to measure and compare the radiation dose in spot films with photofluorography voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) in children.
111 [222 Kidney Urinary Unit (KUU)] pediatric patients, aged 1 month to 5 years, with symptomatic urinary tract infection were enrolled in the study. Peak tube voltage (kVp), exposure setting (mAs), focus film distance (FFD), film size and DAP (after the exam) were recorded for all patients. To evaluate the validity of the photographs, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and agreement between the two methods using the kappa statistic. If the kappa was greater than 0.75, between 0.4-0.75 or less than 0.4, then the agreement was excellent, good or poor, respectively. P values less than 0.05 were statistically significant.
Vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) was detected in 74 KUU (33.3%) in standard films and in 71 (32%) in photographic images. The photographs had no false positives and 3 false negatives. Therefore, the new method had a sensitivity of 96%, a specificity of 100%, a negative predictive value of 98% and a positive predictive value of 100%. The two-method agreement in the VUR diagnosis for grades 1, 4, 5 and the overall grading were excellent (kappa > 0.83); however, for grades 2 and 3, agreement was 80%, which was good (kappa = 0.64).
Our study suggests that the high validity and excellent agreement of the photofluorography method in the diagnosis and grading of VUR, which is comparable to spot films and represents a 50%-90% reduction in radiation, makes it the preferred method.

Download full-text


Available from: Mitra Naseri, Dec 18, 2013
1 Follower
19 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to describe and discuss the various forms of cystography and their clinical value. Conventional fluoroscopic voiding cystourethrography (VCU), radionuclide cystography and the various sonographic cystographic approaches, including echo-enhanced cystosonography (EECS), are described. Their indications, potential, benefit and setbacks/restrictions are discussed with regard to the literature and the constantly changing clinical demand. With the introduction of EECS a new and reliable tool has been established to be useful for follow-up and screening for vesico-ureteral reflux (VUR); however, with the growing importance of functional disturbances a reliable method to evaluate both function and anatomy/VUR as offered by modified VCU is mandatory, and thus VCU remains to play a major part in evaluating children with urinary tract infection, suspected VUR, hydronephrosis or functional bladder disturbances. While EECS offers a new method for certain indications, such as follow-up examinations in VUR or screening, VCU remains an irreplaceable tool for evaluating anatomy (particularly the male urethra) and bladder function (if performed using the modified technique).
    European Radiology 01/2003; 12(12):2910-8. DOI:10.1007/s00330-002-1430-2 · 4.01 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The classification of grading of vesicoureteric reflux (VUR) agreed to by the participants in the International Reflux Study in Children is described. It combines two earlier classifications and is based upon the extent of filling and dilatation by VUR of the ureter, the renal pelvis and the calyces. A standardised technique of voiding cystography is also described to ensure comparability of results.
    Pediatric Radiology 02/1985; 15(2):105-9. DOI:10.1007/BF02388714 · 1.57 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to determine if pulsed fluoroscopy reduces radiation exposure to pediatric patients undergoing conventional fluoroscopy. Four hundred one consecutive patients were nonrandomly divided into pulsed fluoroscopy and conventional fluoroscopy study groups. Two control groups were also assembled: 474 patients evaluated with conventional fluoroscopy before the study and 138 patients evaluated with pulsed fluoroscopy after the study. We found no difference in fluoroscopy times across the groups. Although the number of digital spot films was slightly higher for the pulsed fluoroscopy study group than for the conventional fluoroscopy study group, we found no difference in the number of digital spot films for the pulsed fluoroscopy study group and for the conventional fluoroscopy control group. Furthermore, the difference in the number of digital spot films was also insignificant for the pulsed fluoroscopy control group and the conventional fluoroscopy study group. The radiation exposure in the pulsed fluoroscopy study group was 50% lower (mean, 0.6 R) than in the conventional fluoroscopy study group. When using pulsed fluoroscopy in the 7.5 pulses-per-second mode, we were able to reduce radiation exposure by 75% of that from conventional fluoroscopy. Pulsed fluoroscopy reduces fluoroscopic radiation exposure to pediatric patients undergoing conventional fluoroscopy. Despite minor image degradation, pulsed fluoroscopy is the technique of choice at our institution.
    American Journal of Roentgenology 12/1996; 167(5):1247-53. DOI:10.2214/ajr.167.5.8911190 · 2.73 Impact Factor
Show more