We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
EVALUATION STUDIES
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MR urethrogram versus combined retrograde urethrogram and sonourethrography in diagnosis of urethral stricture.
European Journal of Radiology 2010 June
OBJECTIVES: To compare the accuracy of magnetic resonance (MR) urethrogram versus combined RUG and sonourethrography (SUG) in diagnosis urethral stricture with evaluation of their impact in management choice.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: From March 2006 through February 2007; 30 male patients (mean age, 45+/-18 years, range 15-75) with clinically suspected urethral stricture. All patients underwent RUG, SUG and MR urethrogram.
RESULTS: The final diagnosis of the 30 cases included in our study, after endoscopy and surgical management, was classified into two main groups either isolated stricture (20 cases) or associated with other pathologies (9 cases). There was one case with normal urethral caliber at endoscopy. For the anterior stricture the sensitivity, specificity and overall accuracy of RUG was 91%, 90% and 90%, respectively and for the posterior stricture it was 89%, 91.7% and 90%, respectively. At SUG, all cases of anterior were detected with 100% accuracy while for cases of posterior stricture, the overall accuracy was 60%. MR urethrogram diagnosed all the cases of anterior and posterior stricture with exact delineation of its length except one case of normal caliber was diagnosed falsely at MR as anterior short segment urethral with 100% sensitivity, 91.7% specificity and 95% overall accuracy.
CONCLUSION: MR urethrogram has comparable results with the combined RUG and SUG in diagnosing the anterior and posterior urethral strictures as regard the site and extension and degree of spongiofibrosis but MR is superior in diagnosis of associated pathologies with stricture.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: From March 2006 through February 2007; 30 male patients (mean age, 45+/-18 years, range 15-75) with clinically suspected urethral stricture. All patients underwent RUG, SUG and MR urethrogram.
RESULTS: The final diagnosis of the 30 cases included in our study, after endoscopy and surgical management, was classified into two main groups either isolated stricture (20 cases) or associated with other pathologies (9 cases). There was one case with normal urethral caliber at endoscopy. For the anterior stricture the sensitivity, specificity and overall accuracy of RUG was 91%, 90% and 90%, respectively and for the posterior stricture it was 89%, 91.7% and 90%, respectively. At SUG, all cases of anterior were detected with 100% accuracy while for cases of posterior stricture, the overall accuracy was 60%. MR urethrogram diagnosed all the cases of anterior and posterior stricture with exact delineation of its length except one case of normal caliber was diagnosed falsely at MR as anterior short segment urethral with 100% sensitivity, 91.7% specificity and 95% overall accuracy.
CONCLUSION: MR urethrogram has comparable results with the combined RUG and SUG in diagnosing the anterior and posterior urethral strictures as regard the site and extension and degree of spongiofibrosis but MR is superior in diagnosis of associated pathologies with stricture.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app