Blog
About

0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Computed Tomography and Ultrasonography: A Comparative Study in the Diagnosis of Analgesic Nephropathy

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Computed tomography (CT) and ultrasonography (US) were performed in 40 patients who had consumed excessive quantities of analgesics ( > l kg) to compare their value in the diagnosis of analgesic nephropathy (AN). The computed tomography and sonographic features were renal papillary calcifications. Renal papillary necrosis (RPN) was documented in 20 of 40 patients by US and in 14 of 40 patients by CT. In 11 patients, both US and CT were positive. In 9 patients, US was positive whilst CT was negative. In 3 patients, CT was positive whilst US was negative. Prevalence of RPN was 50% using US and 35% using CT. Using US as a gold standard, sensitivity of CT was 55%, specificity 85%, positive predictive value 78.6% and negative predictive value 34.6%. Percent agreement with CT and US was 70%. Cohen’s kappa statistic adjusting for chance agreement was 40%. Based on these results, it is found that US yielded a higher percentage of positive cases of RPN.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          NEF
          Nephron
          10.1159/issn.1660-8151
          Nephron
          S. Karger AG
          1660-8151
          2235-3186
          1994
          1994
          16 December 2008
          : 66
          : 1
          : 62-66
          Affiliations
          aDepartment of Medicine and bDepartment of Radiology, University Kebangsaan, Kuala Lumpur; cDepartment of Nephrology, General Hospital, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
          Article
          187767 Nephron 1994;66:62–66
          10.1159/000187767
          8107955
          © 1994 S. Karger AG, Basel

          Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

          Page count
          Pages: 5
          Categories
          Original Paper

          Comments

          Comment on this article