Ureterolithiasis: Value of the tail sign in differentiating phleboliths from ureteral calculi at nonenhanced helical CT

Illya C. Boridy, Paul Nikolaidis, Akira Kawashima, Stanford M. Goldman, Carl M. Sandler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

53 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the value of the tail sign in differentiating phleboliths from ureteral calculi at nonenhanced helical computed tomography (CT). MATERIALS AND METHOD: The nonenhanced helical CT scans in 82 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of pelvic ureterolithiasis were retrospectively reviewed. Each calcification along the ureter was classified as a phlebolith or a ureteral calculus on the basis of clinical and imaging findings and was analyzed for the presence of a tail sign. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients each had a single ureteral calculus. None of these calculi were associated with a positive tail sign. Sixty-nine phleboliths were present in 35 patients. Forty-five phleboliths (65%) were associated with a positive tail sign. Of the remaining 24 phleboliths, 17 (25%) were associated with a negative tail sign and seven (10%) were indeterminate. The tail sign has a sensitivity of 65% (45 of 69; 95% CI: 53%, 75%) and a specificity of 100% (82 of 82; 95% Cl: 96%, 100%) in differentiating phleboliths from ureteral calculi. CONCLUSION: The tail sign is an important indicator that a suspicious calcification represents a phlebolith. Absence of the tail sign indicates that the calcification remains indeterminate.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)619-621
Number of pages3
JournalRadiology
Volume211
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Ureterolithiasis
Ureteral Calculi
Spiral Computed Tomography
Calculi
Ureter

Keywords

  • Kidney, CT
  • Ureter, calculi
  • Ureter, CT

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Ureterolithiasis : Value of the tail sign in differentiating phleboliths from ureteral calculi at nonenhanced helical CT. / Boridy, Illya C.; Nikolaidis, Paul; Kawashima, Akira; Goldman, Stanford M.; Sandler, Carl M.

In: Radiology, Vol. 211, No. 3, 01.01.1999, p. 619-621.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Boridy, Illya C. ; Nikolaidis, Paul ; Kawashima, Akira ; Goldman, Stanford M. ; Sandler, Carl M. / Ureterolithiasis : Value of the tail sign in differentiating phleboliths from ureteral calculi at nonenhanced helical CT. In: Radiology. 1999 ; Vol. 211, No. 3. pp. 619-621.
@article{edcd536fa98d41dbb05abe99587e8c0c,
title = "Ureterolithiasis: Value of the tail sign in differentiating phleboliths from ureteral calculi at nonenhanced helical CT",
abstract = "PURPOSE: To determine the value of the tail sign in differentiating phleboliths from ureteral calculi at nonenhanced helical computed tomography (CT). MATERIALS AND METHOD: The nonenhanced helical CT scans in 82 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of pelvic ureterolithiasis were retrospectively reviewed. Each calcification along the ureter was classified as a phlebolith or a ureteral calculus on the basis of clinical and imaging findings and was analyzed for the presence of a tail sign. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients each had a single ureteral calculus. None of these calculi were associated with a positive tail sign. Sixty-nine phleboliths were present in 35 patients. Forty-five phleboliths (65{\%}) were associated with a positive tail sign. Of the remaining 24 phleboliths, 17 (25{\%}) were associated with a negative tail sign and seven (10{\%}) were indeterminate. The tail sign has a sensitivity of 65{\%} (45 of 69; 95{\%} CI: 53{\%}, 75{\%}) and a specificity of 100{\%} (82 of 82; 95{\%} Cl: 96{\%}, 100{\%}) in differentiating phleboliths from ureteral calculi. CONCLUSION: The tail sign is an important indicator that a suspicious calcification represents a phlebolith. Absence of the tail sign indicates that the calcification remains indeterminate.",
keywords = "Kidney, CT, Ureter, calculi, Ureter, CT",
author = "Boridy, {Illya C.} and Paul Nikolaidis and Akira Kawashima and Goldman, {Stanford M.} and Sandler, {Carl M.}",
year = "1999",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1148/radiology.211.3.r99ma44619",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "211",
pages = "619--621",
journal = "Radiology",
issn = "0033-8419",
publisher = "Radiological Society of North America Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ureterolithiasis

T2 - Value of the tail sign in differentiating phleboliths from ureteral calculi at nonenhanced helical CT

AU - Boridy, Illya C.

AU - Nikolaidis, Paul

AU - Kawashima, Akira

AU - Goldman, Stanford M.

AU - Sandler, Carl M.

PY - 1999/1/1

Y1 - 1999/1/1

N2 - PURPOSE: To determine the value of the tail sign in differentiating phleboliths from ureteral calculi at nonenhanced helical computed tomography (CT). MATERIALS AND METHOD: The nonenhanced helical CT scans in 82 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of pelvic ureterolithiasis were retrospectively reviewed. Each calcification along the ureter was classified as a phlebolith or a ureteral calculus on the basis of clinical and imaging findings and was analyzed for the presence of a tail sign. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients each had a single ureteral calculus. None of these calculi were associated with a positive tail sign. Sixty-nine phleboliths were present in 35 patients. Forty-five phleboliths (65%) were associated with a positive tail sign. Of the remaining 24 phleboliths, 17 (25%) were associated with a negative tail sign and seven (10%) were indeterminate. The tail sign has a sensitivity of 65% (45 of 69; 95% CI: 53%, 75%) and a specificity of 100% (82 of 82; 95% Cl: 96%, 100%) in differentiating phleboliths from ureteral calculi. CONCLUSION: The tail sign is an important indicator that a suspicious calcification represents a phlebolith. Absence of the tail sign indicates that the calcification remains indeterminate.

AB - PURPOSE: To determine the value of the tail sign in differentiating phleboliths from ureteral calculi at nonenhanced helical computed tomography (CT). MATERIALS AND METHOD: The nonenhanced helical CT scans in 82 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of pelvic ureterolithiasis were retrospectively reviewed. Each calcification along the ureter was classified as a phlebolith or a ureteral calculus on the basis of clinical and imaging findings and was analyzed for the presence of a tail sign. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients each had a single ureteral calculus. None of these calculi were associated with a positive tail sign. Sixty-nine phleboliths were present in 35 patients. Forty-five phleboliths (65%) were associated with a positive tail sign. Of the remaining 24 phleboliths, 17 (25%) were associated with a negative tail sign and seven (10%) were indeterminate. The tail sign has a sensitivity of 65% (45 of 69; 95% CI: 53%, 75%) and a specificity of 100% (82 of 82; 95% Cl: 96%, 100%) in differentiating phleboliths from ureteral calculi. CONCLUSION: The tail sign is an important indicator that a suspicious calcification represents a phlebolith. Absence of the tail sign indicates that the calcification remains indeterminate.

KW - Kidney, CT

KW - Ureter, calculi

KW - Ureter, CT

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033044076&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033044076&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1148/radiology.211.3.r99ma44619

DO - 10.1148/radiology.211.3.r99ma44619

M3 - Article

C2 - 10352582

AN - SCOPUS:0033044076

VL - 211

SP - 619

EP - 621

JO - Radiology

JF - Radiology

SN - 0033-8419

IS - 3

ER -