Ultrasonography.  2021 Oct;40(4):530-537. 10.14366/usg.20157.

Contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography for the diagnosis of vesicoureteral reflux and intrarenal reflux: a comparison of diagnostic performance with fluoroscopic voiding cystourethrography

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea
  • 2Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
  • 3Department of Radiology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Korea
  • 4Department of Pediatrics, Seoul National University Children’s Hospital, Seoul, Korea
  • 5Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea

Abstract

Purpose
This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography (ce-VUS) using a second-generation ultrasound contrast agent for the diagnosis of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) and intrarenal reflux (IRR), and compared it with that of standard fluoroscopic voiding cystourethrography (VCUG).
Methods
Thirty-two consecutive children from April to October 2019 were included in this study. ce-VUS and VCUG were performed simultaneously by two operators with intravesical infusion of a mixture of ultrasound contrast medium, iodinated contrast medium and water. Two pediatric radiologists independently reviewed the ce-VUS and VCUG images and reported the presence and degree of VUR (grades I-V), and the presence and type of IRR.
Results
Twenty-seven of 63 urinary systems showed VUR. Interobserver agreement for VUR grading was very good for both examinations (κ=0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 0.92 for ce-VUS and κ=0.92; 95% CI, 0.87 to 0.96 for VCUG). The detection rate of VUR showed no significant difference between the two examinations (P=0.370). Four cases of VUR were missed on ce-VUS, while one case of VUR was missed on VCUG. All four false-negative cases on ce-VUS were grade 1 VUR. The two examinations showed very good agreement regarding VUR grading (κ =0.89; 95% CI, 0.81 to 0.96). IRR was more frequently detected with ce-VUS than with VCUG (10 cases with ce-VUS vs. 3 cases with VCUG, P=0.016).
Conclusion
ce-VUS showed very good agreement with VCUG for detecting grade 2 VUR and above, while grade 1 VUR was sometimes missed with ce-VUS. IRR was more frequently detected with ce-VUS than with VCUG.

Keyword

Vesicoureteral reflux; Ultrasonography; Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography; Intrarenal reflux; Voiding cystourethrography
Full Text Links
  • USG
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2022 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr