Rafael Moreira Cobo1, Leonardo Kayat Bittencourt2. 1. MD, Radiologist, Unit of Internal Medicine at Clínica CDPI, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. 2. PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Radiology, Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), Niterói, RJ, Brazil.
The study of the urogenital system has been subject of interest amongst the Brazilian
radiological community(. In the context of this subspecialty,
renal cystic lesions constitute an extremely frequent finding (in 50% of the population
above the age of 50)(,
sometimes representing a great challenge in daily radiological practice. This theme of high
relevance is constantly object of debate among surgeons and medical imaging professionals,
since the differentiation between benign complex cysts and renal cystic carcinomas is of
paramount relevance for the choice of the therapeutic approach(.Considering the importance and complexity of renal cysts presentation, Morton A. Bosniak,
in 1986, published a study proposing a categorization of such lesions in order to
standardize the description of such lesions and their approach based on findings at
intravenous contrast-enhanced computed tomography(. The original description proposed by Bosniak for 28
years ago is widely used nowadays with few changes, corroborating the relevance of a full
command of the classification of these lesions by radiologists and urologists in their
daily practices(.Initially, the cysts were classified from I to IV, where I corresponded to a simple cyst;
II, a minimally complex cyst with low malignancy probability; III, a complex cyst with
moderate malignancy probability; and IV, a cyst with a frankly solid component and high
malignancy probability(. The
categories I and IV have always presented a great interobserver agreement in relation to
their descriptions and approach, but, at the first years, there was a great interobserver
disagreement in relation to the categories II and III. As a cyst was not sufficiently
complex to fulfill the characteristics to be included in category III, but presented with
somewhat complex characteristics to be classified as II, questionings were raised as
regards the approach to be adopted, i.e., surgical approach for category III and finishing
investigation for category II(. Then, the
category IIF was created, suggesting serial imaging follow-up for cysts with those
characteristics(.Over almost 30 years of the Bosniak classification, several studies have been published
with numbers which corroborate the efficacy and reproducibility of such classification in
the radiologists’ daily practice(. For this reason, the review article
published by Muglia and Westphalen in the present issue of Radiologia
Brasileira( is
extremely important as the authors make a historical review of the main publications
approaching the theme, with an overview of the classification in the current days, focusing
on the most complex and controversial elements such as the differentiation of categories
II, IIF and III(, the
impact of the utilization of the category IIF on the clinical practice, and the follow-up
of cysts IIF(. The article also approaches the utilization of other imaging
methods (ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging) in comparison with computed
tomography in the diagnosis and clinical management of these cysts(, besides indicating future and promising
prospects with the use of intravenous contrast-enhanced ultrasonography( and diffusion-weighted magnetic
resonance imaging.
Authors: Christiana Maia Nobre Rocha de Miranda; Carol Pontes de Miranda Maranhão; Carla Jotta Justo Dos Santos; Igor Gomes Padilha; Lucas de Pádua Gomes de Farias; Milzi Sarmento da Rocha Journal: Radiol Bras Date: 2014 Mar-Apr