Literature DB >> 28592361

CT imaging of solid renal masses: pitfalls and solutions.

S Krishna1, C A Murray1, M D McInnes1, R Chatelain1, M Siddaiah1, O Al-Dandan2, S Narayanasamy1, N Schieda3.   

Abstract

Computed tomography (CT) remains the first-line imaging test for the characterisation of renal masses; however, CT has inherent limitations, which if unrecognised, may result in errors. The purpose of this manuscript is to present 10 pitfalls in the CT evaluation of solid renal masses. Thin section non-contrast enhanced CT (NECT) is required to confirm the presence of macroscopic fat and diagnosis of angiomyolipoma (AML). Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) can mimic renal cysts at NECT when measuring <20 HU, but are usually heterogeneous with irregular margins. Haemorrhagic cysts (HC) may simulate solid lesions at NECT; however, a homogeneous lesion measuring >70 HU is essentially diagnostic of HC. Homogeneous lesions measuring 20-70 HU at NECT or >20 HU at contrast-enhanced (CE) CT, are indeterminate, requiring further evaluation. Dual-energy CT (DECT) can accurately characterise these lesions at baseline through virtual NECT, iodine overlay images, or quantitative iodine concentration analysis without recalling the patient. A minority of hypo-enhancing renal masses (most commonly papillary RCC) show indeterminate or absent enhancement at multiphase CT. Follow-up, CE ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is required to further characterise these lesions. Small (<3 cm) endophytic cysts commonly show pseudo-enhancement, which may simulate RCC; this can be overcome with DECT or MRI. In small (<4 cm) solid renal masses, 20% of lesions are benign, chiefly AML without visible fat or oncocytoma. Low-dose techniques may simulate lesion heterogeneity due to increased image noise, which can be ameliorated through the appropriate use of iterative reconstruction algorithms.
Copyright © 2017 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28592361     DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2017.05.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Radiol        ISSN: 0009-9260            Impact factor:   2.350


  18 in total

Review 1.  Imaging Protocols for Active Surveillance in Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Christine W Liaw; Jared S Winoker; Reza Mehrazin
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2018-08-13       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 2.  Adrenal myelolipoma: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  Ábel Decmann; Pál Perge; Miklós Tóth; Peter Igaz
Journal:  Endocrine       Date:  2017-11-21       Impact factor: 3.633

3.  Importance of phase enhancement for machine learning classification of solid renal masses using texture analysis features at multi-phasic CT.

Authors:  Nicola Schieda; Kathleen Nguyen; Rebecca E Thornhill; Matthew D F McInnes; Mark Wu; Nick James
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2020-07-05

Review 4.  Renal Cell Carcinoma Ablation: Preprocedural, Intraprocedural, and Postprocedural Imaging.

Authors:  Winston B Joe; Jessica G Zarzour; Andrew J Gunn
Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer       Date:  2019-11-29

5.  Single-material beam hardening correction via an analytical energy response model for diagnostic CT.

Authors:  Viktor Haase; Katharina Hahn; Harald Schöndube; Karl Stierstorfer; Andreas Maier; Frédéric Noo
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 4.506

Review 6.  Long Non-Coding RNAs as Novel Biomarkers in the Clinical Management of Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients: A Promise or a Pledge?

Authors:  Francesco Trevisani; Matteo Floris; Riccardo Vago; Roberto Minnei; Alessandra Cinque
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 7.666

7.  Validation of Region of Interest Measurements for the Objective Assessment of Post-Contrast Enhancement of Renal Lesions on MRI.

Authors:  Ishaq Sulaiman Al Salmi; Joshua Halperin; Faten Al-Douri; Vincent Leung; Michael Patlas; Abdullah Alabousi
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 8.  Bosniak classification of cystic renal masses, version 2019: interpretation pitfalls and recommendations to avoid misclassification.

Authors:  Elizabeth Edney; Matthew S Davenport; Nicole Curci; Nicola Schieda; Satheesh Krishna; Nicole Hindman; Stuart G Silverman; Ivan Pedrosa
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2021-01-23

9.  Available active surveillance follow-up protocols for small renal mass: a systematic review.

Authors:  Giacomo Rebez; Nicola Pavan; M Carmen Mir
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-01-16       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 10.  Update on MRI of Cystic Renal Masses Including Bosniak Version 2019.

Authors:  Satheesh Krishna; Nicola Schieda; Ivan Pedrosa; Nicole Hindman; Ronaldo H Baroni; Stuart G Silverman; Matthew S Davenport
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2020-10-02       Impact factor: 4.813

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.