PURPOSE: To observe ultrasonographic features of urothelial carcinoma in renal pelvis and evaluate contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-two patients with urothelial carcinoma underwent preoperative conventional US, colour Doppler flow imaging (CDFI) and CEUS. RESULTS: Of 52 total lesions, 41 (78.8%) could be clearly identified by US, and 49 (94.2%) were enhanced by CEUS. Among US-imaged lesions, 39 (95.1%) were solid tumours, and two (4.9%) were mixed solid-cystic; 25 (61.0%) were isoechoic, 11 (26.8%) hypoechoic, and five (12.2%) hyperechoic. Analysis of tumour blood flow by CDFI characterised 17 avascular lesions (41.5% of total), 16 hypovascular (39.0%), and 8 hypervascular (19.5%). The resistance index ranged from 0.65 to 0.88 (mean of 0.71). Enhancement was seen in 49 lesions after injection of SonoVue. A slow enhancement pattern was observed in 36 lesions (73.5%) relative to renal cortex, and 13/49 (26.5%) showed simultaneous enhancement. At peak enhancement, 38 lesions (77.6%) were hypo-enhanced, six (12.2%) iso-enhanced, and five (10.2%) hyper-enhanced. There were 12 lesions with intertumoural necrosis or haemorrhage (24.5%) that were heterogeneously enhanced, and 37 (75.5%) were homogeneously enhanced. A fast washout pattern was observed in 46 lesions (93.9%), synchronous washout in two (4.08%), and slow washout in one (2.04%). CONCLUSIONS: Slow-in, fast-out, and hypo-enhancement properties are associated with renal urothelial carcinoma and may thus have diagnostic value. We found that CEUS is able to identify tumours that are ambiguous by conventional US, and it thus significantly improves the confidence of diagnosis. Crown
PURPOSE: To observe ultrasonographic features of urothelial carcinoma in renal pelvis and evaluate contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-two patients with urothelial carcinoma underwent preoperative conventional US, colour Doppler flow imaging (CDFI) and CEUS. RESULTS: Of 52 total lesions, 41 (78.8%) could be clearly identified by US, and 49 (94.2%) were enhanced by CEUS. Among US-imaged lesions, 39 (95.1%) were solid tumours, and two (4.9%) were mixed solid-cystic; 25 (61.0%) were isoechoic, 11 (26.8%) hypoechoic, and five (12.2%) hyperechoic. Analysis of tumour blood flow by CDFI characterised 17 avascular lesions (41.5% of total), 16 hypovascular (39.0%), and 8 hypervascular (19.5%). The resistance index ranged from 0.65 to 0.88 (mean of 0.71). Enhancement was seen in 49 lesions after injection of SonoVue. A slow enhancement pattern was observed in 36 lesions (73.5%) relative to renal cortex, and 13/49 (26.5%) showed simultaneous enhancement. At peak enhancement, 38 lesions (77.6%) were hypo-enhanced, six (12.2%) iso-enhanced, and five (10.2%) hyper-enhanced. There were 12 lesions with intertumoural necrosis or haemorrhage (24.5%) that were heterogeneously enhanced, and 37 (75.5%) were homogeneously enhanced. A fast washout pattern was observed in 46 lesions (93.9%), synchronous washout in two (4.08%), and slow washout in one (2.04%). CONCLUSIONS: Slow-in, fast-out, and hypo-enhancement properties are associated with renal urothelial carcinoma and may thus have diagnostic value. We found that CEUS is able to identify tumours that are ambiguous by conventional US, and it thus significantly improves the confidence of diagnosis. Crown