PURPOSE: Postrenal reasons of renal transplant failure can be assessed by magnetic resonance urography. This study was designed to retrospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy of static fluid (T2-)MRU compared to contrast enhanced (CE-)MRU in patients with renal transplant failure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-five consecutive patients (14 female, 21 men; mean age 48.6 years) with renal transplant failure and sonographically detected hydronephrosis were examined both with T2-MRU as well as CE-MRU resulting in 39 MRU examinations. MRU was performed both using T2-weighted HASTE-sequence (T2-MRU) as well as Gadolinium-enhanced 3D-FLASH-sequence (CE-MRU) on a 1.5-T clinical MRI scanner (Magnetom Vision, Siemens Medical Solutions). Subjective image quality of resulting maximum intensity projection was assessed in consensus by two readers blinded to the final diagnosis, using a five point scale. MRU findings were correlated to sonography, operative results or clinical follow up. RESULTS: CE-MRU yielded a sensitivity of 85.7% (T2-MRU 76.2%), and a specificity of 83.3% (T2-MRU: 73.7%), however statistical significance was not reached. The subjective image quality was significantly better in CE-MRU. CONCLUSIONS: Only concerning subjective image quality CE-MRU proved superior to T2-MRU. Yet, there was no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between T2- and CE-MRU. Thinking of incipient nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, T2-MRU can be used as reliable alternative in patients with decreased renal transplant function due to urological complications.
PURPOSE: Postrenal reasons of renal transplant failure can be assessed by magnetic resonance urography. This study was designed to retrospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy of static fluid (T2-)MRU compared to contrast enhanced (CE-)MRU in patients with renal transplant failure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-five consecutive patients (14 female, 21 men; mean age 48.6 years) with renal transplant failure and sonographically detected hydronephrosis were examined both with T2-MRU as well as CE-MRU resulting in 39 MRU examinations. MRU was performed both using T2-weighted HASTE-sequence (T2-MRU) as well as Gadolinium-enhanced 3D-FLASH-sequence (CE-MRU) on a 1.5-T clinical MRI scanner (Magnetom Vision, Siemens Medical Solutions). Subjective image quality of resulting maximum intensity projection was assessed in consensus by two readers blinded to the final diagnosis, using a five point scale. MRU findings were correlated to sonography, operative results or clinical follow up. RESULTS: CE-MRU yielded a sensitivity of 85.7% (T2-MRU 76.2%), and a specificity of 83.3% (T2-MRU: 73.7%), however statistical significance was not reached. The subjective image quality was significantly better in CE-MRU. CONCLUSIONS: Only concerning subjective image quality CE-MRU proved superior to T2-MRU. Yet, there was no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between T2- and CE-MRU. Thinking of incipient nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, T2-MRU can be used as reliable alternative in patients with decreased renal transplant function due to urological complications.