Volume 30, Issue 4 (Avicenna Journal of Clinical Medicine-Winter 2024)
Avicenna J Clin Med 2024, 30(4): 218-224 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Mohamadi S, Mirfendereski S, Momeni A, Ahmadi A. Measurement and Comparison of Kidney Dimension Using Ultrasonography and Computed Tomography Scan. Avicenna J Clin Med 2024; 30 (4) :218-224
URL: http://sjh.umsha.ac.ir/article-1-2868-en.html
URL: http://sjh.umsha.ac.ir/article-1-2868-en.html
1- Resident of Radio-Oncology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
2- Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
3- Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran
2- Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
3- Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran
Abstract: (1982 Views)
Background and Objective: The measurement of renal size is of utmost importance in patients with renal failure, especially azotemia. The present study aimed to assess and compare kidney size using ultrasonography and computed tomography (CT) scans.
Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted on subjects over 18 years of age who were referred to Hajar Hospital of Shahrekord for an ultrasound and CT scan of the kidney or abdomen with a time interval of less than one week. Kidney dimensions were measured by transabdominal ultrasound model Mindray DC-60Exp with 2-5 MHz probe in supine position and oblique if needed. After less than a week, the dimensions of the kidneys were determined by a Siemens 16-slice CT scan machine (with reconstruction at different stages). Data were analyzed in SPSS software using statistical tests.
Results: Right and left kidney dimensions using ultrasonography were obtained at 103.46±13.53 and 107.44±12.15 mm, respectively. These dimensions were 103.10±15.76 and 108.81±14.77 mm, respectively, using a CT scan. The agreement between the ultrasonography and CT scan in determining right and left kidney dimensions was higher than 95% in 96.7% and 95% of all cases, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, false positive value, negative-positive value, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for right kidneys were reported as 82.4%, 92.6%, 7.4%, 17.6%, 73.7%, and 95.4% using ultrasonography. These values for the left kidney were 88, 88.6, 11.4, 11, 45.8, and 98.5%, respectively.
Conclusion: Regarding the importance of kidney size in determining renal failure, it seems that in some cases, reliance on ultrasonography is unclear, and it is recommended that kidney size be determined using a CT scan in patients with suspected kidney failure
Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted on subjects over 18 years of age who were referred to Hajar Hospital of Shahrekord for an ultrasound and CT scan of the kidney or abdomen with a time interval of less than one week. Kidney dimensions were measured by transabdominal ultrasound model Mindray DC-60Exp with 2-5 MHz probe in supine position and oblique if needed. After less than a week, the dimensions of the kidneys were determined by a Siemens 16-slice CT scan machine (with reconstruction at different stages). Data were analyzed in SPSS software using statistical tests.
Results: Right and left kidney dimensions using ultrasonography were obtained at 103.46±13.53 and 107.44±12.15 mm, respectively. These dimensions were 103.10±15.76 and 108.81±14.77 mm, respectively, using a CT scan. The agreement between the ultrasonography and CT scan in determining right and left kidney dimensions was higher than 95% in 96.7% and 95% of all cases, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, false positive value, negative-positive value, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for right kidneys were reported as 82.4%, 92.6%, 7.4%, 17.6%, 73.7%, and 95.4% using ultrasonography. These values for the left kidney were 88, 88.6, 11.4, 11, 45.8, and 98.5%, respectively.
Conclusion: Regarding the importance of kidney size in determining renal failure, it seems that in some cases, reliance on ultrasonography is unclear, and it is recommended that kidney size be determined using a CT scan in patients with suspected kidney failure
Extended Abstract [HTML 49 KB] (61 Download)
References
1. Ninan V, Koshi KT, Niyamthullah M, Jacob C, Gopalakrishnan G, Pandey A, et al. A comparative study of methods of estimating renal size in normal adults. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1990;5(10):851-4. PMID: 2128379 DOI: 10.1093/ndt/5.10.851
2. Christiansen JS, Gammelgaard J, Frandsen M, Parving H-H. Increased kidney size, glomerular filtration rate and renal plasma flow in short-term insulin-dependent diabetics. Diabetologia. 1981;20(4):451-6. PMID: 7016638 DOI: 10.1007/BF00253406
3. Bakker J, Olree M, Kaatee R, de Lange EE, Beek FJ. In vitro measurement of kidney size: comparison of ultrasonography and MRI. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1998;24(5):683-8. PMID: 9695271 DOI: 10.1016/s0301-5629(97)00212-3
4. Webb WR, Brant WE, Major NM. Fundamentals of Body CT E-Book: Elsevier Health Sciences. 2014.
5. Ghafoori M, Zahiri Z. Assessment of the renal length measurement accuracy on spiral CT scan with multiplanar reconstruction of images (MPR) in Hashemi Nejad Hospital in 2004. RJMS. 2006;13(50):127-34.
6. Brandt TD, Neiman H, Dragowski M, Bulawa W, Claykamp G. Ultrasound assessment of normal renal dimensions. J Ultrasound Med. 1982;1(2):49-52. PMID: 6152926 DOI: 10.7863/jum.1982.1.2.49
7. Kang K-Y, Lee YJ, Park SC, Yang CW, Kim Y-S, Moon IS, et al. A comparative study of methods of estimating kidney length in kidney transplantation donors. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2007;22(8):2322-7. PMID: 17452412 DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfm192
8. Van NDN, Velghe A, Petrovic M, Vandewiele C, Lameire N, Voet D, et al. The role of ultrasonography in the assessment of renal function in the elderly. J Nephrol. 2003;16(5):658-62. PMID: 14733411
9. Miletić D, Fučkar Ž, Šustić A, Mozetič V, Štimac D, Žauhar G. Sonographic measurement of absolute and relative renal length in adults. J Clin Ultrasound. 1998;26(4):185-9. PMID:9572380 DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0096(199805)26:4<185::aid-jcu1>3.0.co;2-9
10. Wang F, Cheok S, Kuan B. Renal size in healthy Malaysian adults by ultrasonography. Med J Malaysia. 1989; (1):45-51. PMID:2696868
11. Kotre C, Owen J. Method for the evaluation of renal parenchymal volume by X-ray computed tomography. Med Biol Eng Comput. 1994;32(3):338-41. PMID: 7934262 DOI: 10.1007/BF02512534
12. Lerman LO, Bentley MD, Bell MR, Rumberger JA, Romero JC. Quantitation of the in vivo kidney volume with cine computed tomography. Invest Radiol. 1990;25(11):1206-11. PMID: 2254054 DOI: 10.1097/00004424-199011000-00009
13. Yokoyama M, Watanabe K, Inatsuki S, Ochi K, Takeuchi M. Measurement of renal parenchymal volume using computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1982;6(5):975-7. PMID:7142515 DOI: 10.1097/00004728-198210000-00019
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Articles Copyright © The Author(s).
Owned by Hamadan University of Medical Sciences
Published by UMSHA Press
Journal Tel: +988138380924
Publisher Tel:+988138380548
Website: http://sjh.umsha.ac.ir
Email: s_ journal[at]umsha.ac.ir
