title: Role of non-contrast spiral computerized tomography in acute ureteric colic.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of noncontrast helical computerized tomography (CT) in ureteric colic with comparative evaluation of KUB and ultrasonography (USG).
  
  
  METHODS
  Tertiary care university hospital.
  
  
  METHODS
  One hundred patients aged between 20 and 75 years referred from the emergency department as acute ureteric colic were evaluated with KUB and USG followed by noncontrast helical CT.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Noncontrast helical CT was 91% sensitive and 98% specific in detecting urolithiasis compared to a sensitivity of 20% and 30% for KUB and USG and specificity of 94% and 98% respectively.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Noncontrast helical CT is a very sensitive and specific investigation for evaluation of acute flank pain due to urolithiasis, besides helping in the detection of nonrenal causes of pain.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiodiagnosis, Sher-i-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar, India.
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Feroze
authors.forename: Baldev
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Singh
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Gojwari
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Manjeet
authors.forename: Bashir
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Athar
authors.forename: Hussain
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Hamid
references.citation: Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl. 1991;137:45-7
references.pmid: 1947840
references.citation: J Urol. 1997 Jun;157(6):2071-3
references.pmid: 9146582
references.citation: Radiology. 2003 Aug;228(2):319-29
references.pmid: 12819343
references.citation: Radiology. 2003 Nov;229(2):575-80
references.pmid: 14526095
references.citation: Radiology. 1997 Jul;204(1):27-31
references.pmid: 9205218
references.citation: J Urol. 1998 Mar;159(3):735-40
references.pmid: 9474137
references.citation: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001 Aug;177(2):325-30
references.pmid: 11461855
references.citation: Clin Radiol. 1993 May;47(5):333-6
references.pmid: 8508595
references.citation: Radiology. 1995 Mar;194(3):789-94
references.pmid: 7862980
references.citation: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999 Dec;173(6):1447-50
references.pmid: 10584780
references.citation: Eur Radiol. 2002 Sep;12(9):2136-50
references.pmid: 12195463
references.citation: Urology. 1998 Dec;52(6):982-7
references.pmid: 9836541
references.citation: Eur Radiol. 1998;8(2):212-7
references.pmid: 9477267
references.citation: Eur Radiol. 2002 Mar;12(3):575-91
references.pmid: 11870472