Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38813369›Full record

ArticleJournal of medicine and life2024

Ultrasound accuracy in evaluating renal calculi in Maysan province.

Saud Kadhim Abbas, Thaer Saleh Sabor Al-Omary, Hayder Adnan Fawzi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medicine and life, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Saud Kadhim AbbasDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Misan, Misan, Iraq.
Thaer Saleh Sabor Al-OmaryDepartment of Surgery, College of Medicine, University of Misan, Misan, Iraq.
Hayder Adnan FawziAl-Mustafa University College, Baghdad, Iraq.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Renal calculi are a common clinical presentation. While ultrasound (US) is a widely used imaging modality for kidney stone diagnosis due to its accessibility and lower cost, its accuracy compared to computerized tomography (CT), the gold standard, remains understudied. This cross-sectional study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound for detecting and characterizing kidney stones compared to computed tomography (CT). Fifty-six patients with suspected kidney stones based on flank pain underwent abdominal ultrasound to assess stone presence, size, location, and the severity of any hydronephrosis (kidney swelling). These findings were then confirmed with a subsequent non-contrast CT scan. There was a fair agreement between US and CT (Kappa = 0.368) for detecting the stone location. The US could not detect 7 (12.5%) stones, being less sensitive in the middle and upper calyx compared to CT. There was a fair agreement between the US and CT (Kappa = 0.394) for detecting the severity of hydronephrosis. The US was less sensitive to moderate and severe hydronephrosis compared to CT. The abdominal ultrasound demonstrated excellent reliability for stone size measurement (intraclass correlation = 0.924), with CT measurements only slightly larger on average (mean difference 0.9 mm). Although abdominal ultrasound provides reliable stone size assessment, its capacity to accurately localize stones and assess hydronephrosis severity is limited.

Indexed as

Kidney CalculiTomography, X-Ray ComputedUltrasonographyAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansHydronephrosisMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsCI, Confidence IntervalCT, Computed TomographyhydronephrosisICC, Intraclass CorrelationIVU, Intravenous UrographyKUB, Kidney-Ureter-Bladder X-raynephrolithiasisreliabilitystone locationstone sizeUS, Ultrasound

Identifiers

PMID38813369
PMCPMC11131636

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.