Objective:

To compare the discrepancy in computed tomography (CT) interpretations between urologists and radiologists in relation to urolithiasis and determine whether it can affect treatment.

Materials and methods:

All the patients with a radiologic report of urolithiasis were analyzed, utilizing the Cohen’s kappa statistic and the Mann-Whitney U test, within the time frame of November 2017 to May 2018.

Results:

A total of 142 patients, made up of 56.3% men and 43.7% women, with a mean age of 46 years, were included in the study. The main indication for CT was pain (74.6%), the most frequently ordered CT was a non-contrast scan (82.4%), and 36.6% of the studies were bilateral. Stone size, HU, and ectasia grade were not present in the radiologic reports at 8.6%, 17.3%, and 12.3%, respectively. Overall concordance for stone size was 20% when there was more than one stone, and 55% when there was a single stone (p(0.001). Concordance was 77% when stone size was classified according to the AUA (p(0.001).

Conclusions:

There was considerable variation between the two specialties, emphasizing the need to utilize morphometry as a standardized method, thus obtaining a better, more accurate interpretation. It is important for the urologist to view the CT scan before deciding upon management. An estimated 31% of urologists rely solely on the report of the radiologist.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in Spanish     · Spanish ( pdf )