Comparison of Conventional and Triple Bolus Computerized Tomographic Urography Protocols for Radiation Dose Reduction in Hematuria Evaluation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Computerized tomographic urography is the diagnostic tool of choice for evaluating hematuria. In keeping with the ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) principle, we evaluated a triple bolus computerized tomography protocol designed to reduce radiation exposure.Patients with macroscopic or microscopic hematuria were prospectively randomized to conventional computerized tomography (100) or triple bolus computerized tomography (100). The triple bolus computerized tomography protocol entails 2 scans: pre-contrast scan followed by 3 contrast injections at 40 seconds, 60 seconds and 20 minutes prior to the second scan to capture all 3 phases. The conventional computerized tomography protocol requires 4 scans: pre-contrast scan, and 3 post-contrast scans at the corticomedullary, nephrographic and excretory phases. Radiation exposure and the detection of urological pathology were recorded based on radiology reports.There were no differences in patient demographics or body mass index between the 2 groups. Triple bolus computerized tomography exposed patients to 33% less radiation (1,715 vs 1,145 mGy*cm for conventional vs triple bolus computerized tomography; p0.001). For macroscopic hematuria, the pathology detection rates were 70% for triple bolus and 73% for conventional computerized tomography (p=0.72). For microscopic hematuria, the detection rates were 59% for triple bolus and 50% for conventional computerized tomography (p=0.68). In both groups, the rates of detection of urolithiasis, renal cysts, urological masses, bladder pathology and prostate pathology were no different between triple bolus and conventional computerized tomography.In both the settings of macroscopic and microscopic hematuria evaluation, triple bolus computerized tomography significantly reduces radiation exposure while providing equivalent detection of genitourinary pathology compared to conventional computerized tomography. The ability to detect upper tract filling defects was not specifically tested.