Loading…

Diagnosing urinary tract abnormalities: intravenous urography or CT urography?

For many years, intravenous urography (IVU) was the modality of choice for diagnosing urinary tract abnormalities. IVU has many drawbacks including poor diagnostic accuracy in diagnosis and characterization of parenchymal lesions, also in cases of nonfunctioning kidneys. It has little diagnostic rol...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Reports in Medical Imaging 2014, Vol.7, p.55
Main Authors: Ghar, Mohamed Abou El, Refaie, Huda, Sharaf, Doaa, Diasty, Tarek El
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:For many years, intravenous urography (IVU) was the modality of choice for diagnosing urinary tract abnormalities. IVU has many drawbacks including poor diagnostic accuracy in diagnosis and characterization of parenchymal lesions, also in cases of nonfunctioning kidneys. It has little diagnostic role to detect the cause of obstruction in absence of radio-opaque stones along the course of the urinary tract (UT). In the last two decades, with the era of the computed tomography (CT), CT has become the gold standard for diagnosis of urinary stones, while multiphasic CT urography (CTU) has become the most useful diagnostic tool in different UT abnormalities including complex congenital anomalies, trauma, infection and tumors. Also, the "one-stop-shop" use of CTU in different anomalies including vascular, parenchymal, and urothelial evaluation has a great impact in management of patients. CT has many disadvantages over IVU including its high cost and the higher radiation dose but it is more effective than IVU. Keywords: CTU, IVU, urinary tract, obstruction, tumor, congenital
ISSN:1179-1586
1179-1586
DOI:10.2147/RMI.S35592