These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Voiding urosonography with second-generation contrast agent versus voiding cystourethrography. Author: Kis E, Nyitrai A, Várkonyi I, Máttyus I, Cseprekál O, Reusz G, Szabó A. Journal: Pediatr Nephrol; 2010 Nov; 25(11):2289-93. PubMed ID: 20686902. Abstract: Contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography (VUS) is becoming more widely used for the diagnosis of vesicoureteric reflux (VUR). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity of VUS using a second-generation ultrasound (US) contrast agent and compare it with standard fluoroscopic voiding cystourethrography (VCUG). A total of 183 children with 366 kidney-ureter units (KUUs) underwent VUS and VCUG in the same session with the same catheterization. VUS was performed after intravesical administration of 1 ml of a second-generation ultrasound contrast agent (UCA; SonoVue, Bracco, Italy). VUR was detected in 140 out of 366 cases (38%); in 89 (24.3%) by both methods, in 37 (10.1%) by VUS only, and in 14 (3.8%) by VCUG only. Although there was considerable agreement in the diagnosis of VUR by VUS and VCUG (κ=0.68, standard error [κ]=0.04), the difference in the detection rate of reflux between VUS and VCUG was significant (p<0.00001). The grade of VUR detected with VUS showed moderate agreement with grading by VCUG. Our findings suggest that contrast-enhanced harmonic VUS using a second-generation contrast agent is superior to VCUG in the detection and grading of VUR, and it should be the method of choice for this clinical indication.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]