nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.10.2015 | Review Article

Quantitative assessment of solid renal masses by contrast-enhanced ultrasound with time–intensity curves: how we do it

verfasst von: Kevin G. King, Mittul Gulati, Harshawn Malhi, Darryl Hwang, Inderbir S. Gill, Phillip M. Cheng, Edward G. Grant, Vinay A. Duddalwar

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 7/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To discuss the evaluation of the enhancement curve over time of the major renal cell carcinoma (RCC) subtypes, oncocytoma, and lipid-poor angiomyolipoma, to aid in the preoperative differentiation of these entities. Differentiation of these lesions is important, given the different prognoses of the subtypes, as well as the desire to avoid resecting benign lesions.

Methods

We discuss findings from CT, MR, and US, but with a special emphasis on contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). CEUS technique is described, as well as time–intensity curve analysis.

Results

Examples of each of the major RCC subtypes (clear cell, papillary, and chromophobe) are shown, as well as examples of oncocytoma and lipid-poor angiomyolipoma. For each lesion, the time–intensity curve of enhancement on CEUS is reviewed, and correlated with the enhancement curve over time reported for multiphase CT and MR.

Conclusions

Preoperative differentiation of the most common solid renal masses is important, and the time–intensity curves of these lesions show some distinguishing features that can aid in this differentiation. The use of CEUS is increasing, and as a modality it is especially well suited to the evaluation of the time–intensity curve.

American Cancer Society (2014) Cancer facts and figures 2014. http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@research/documents/webcontent/acspc-042151.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2014

Kutikov A, Fossett LK, Ramchandani P, et al. (2006) Incidence of benign pathologic findings at partial nephrectomy for solitary renal mass presumed to be renal cell carcinoma on preoperative imaging. Urology 68(4):737–740CrossRefPubMed

Remzi M, Ozsoy M, Klingler HC, et al. (2006) Are small renal tumors harmless? Analysis of histopathological features according to tumors 4 cm or less in diameter. J Urol 176(3):896–899CrossRefPubMed

Fujii Y, Komai Y, Saito K, et al. (2008) Incidence of benign pathologic lesions at partial nephrectomy for presumed RCC renal masses: Japanese dual-center experience with 176 consecutive patients. Urology 72(3):598–602CrossRefPubMed

Jeon HG, Lee SR, Kim KH, et al. (2010) Benign lesions after partial nephrectomy for presumed renal cell carcinoma in masses 4 cm or less: prevalence and predictors in Korean patients. Urology 76(3):574–579CrossRefPubMed

Sasiwimonphan K, Takahashi N, Leibovich BC, et al. (2012) Small (<4 cm) renal mass: differentiation of angiomyolipoma without visible fat from renal cell carcinoma utilizing MR imaging. Radiology 263(1):160–168CrossRefPubMed

Hindman N, Ngo L, Genega EM, et al. (2012) Angiomyolipoma with minimal fat: can it be differentiated from clear cell renal cell carcinoma by using standard MR techniques? Radiology 265(2):468–477PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Prasad SR, Humphrey PA, Catena JR, et al. (2006) Common and uncommon histologic subtypes of renal cell carcinoma: imaging spectrum with pathologic correlation. Radiographics 26(6):1795–1806CrossRefPubMed

Crumley SM, Divatia M, Truong L, et al. (2013) Renal cell carcinoma: Evolving and emerging subtypes. World J Clin Cases 1(9):262–275PubMedCentralPubMed

10.

Shuch B, Amin A, Armstrong AJ, et al. (2015) Understanding pathologic variants of renal cell carcinoma: distilling therapeutic opportunities from biologic complexity. Eur Urol 67(1):85–97CrossRefPubMed

11.

Ng CS, Wood CG, Silverman PM, et al. (2008) Renal cell carcinoma: diagnosis, staging, and surveillance. Am J Roentgenol 191(4):1220–1232CrossRef

12.

Gerst S, Hann LE, Li D, et al. (2011) Evaluation of renal masses with contrast-enhanced ultrasound: initial experience. Am J Roentgenol 197(4):897–906CrossRef

13.

Jinzaki M, Tanimoto A, Mukai M, et al. (2000) Double-phase helical CT of small renal parenchymal neoplasms: correlation with pathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 24(6):835–842CrossRefPubMed

14.

MacLennan GT, Bostwick DG (1995) Microvessel density in renal cell carcinoma: lack of prognostic significance. Urology 46(1):27–30CrossRefPubMed

15.

Piscaglia F, Nolsøe C, Dietrich CF, et al. (2011) The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical practice of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. https://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0031-1281676. Accessed 8 Aug 2014

16.

Lantheus Medical Imaging. Definity prescribing information. http://www.definityimaging.com/pdf/DEFINITY%20Prescribing%20Information%20515987-0413.pdf. Accessed 9 Aug 2014

17.

Correas JM, Bridal L, Lesavre A, et al. (2001) Ultrasound contrast agents: properties, principles of action, tolerance, and artifacts. Eur Radiol 11(8):1316–1328CrossRefPubMed

18.

McArthur C, Baxter GM (2012) Current and potential renal applications of contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Clin Radiol 67(9):909–922CrossRefPubMed

19.

Wei K, Mulvagh SL, Carson L, et al. (2008) The safety of definity and optison for ultrasound image enhancement: a retrospective analysis of 78,383 administered contrast doses. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 21(11):1202–1206CrossRefPubMed

20.

Main ML, Goldman JH, Grayburn PA (2007) Thinking outside the “box”—the ultrasound contrast controversy. J Am Coll Cardiol 50(25):2434–2437CrossRefPubMed

21.

Main ML, Hibberd MG, Ryan A, et al. (2014) Acute mortality in critically ill patients undergoing echocardiography with or without an ultrasound contrast agent. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 7(1):40–48CrossRefPubMed

22.

Xue LY, Lu Q, Huang BJ, et al. (2014) Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for evaluation of cystic renal mass: in comparison to contrast-enhanced CT and conventional ultrasound. Abdom Imaging 39(6):1274–1283CrossRefPubMed

23.

Aoki S, Hattori R, Yamamoto T, et al. (2011) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound using a time–intensity curve for the diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma. BJU Int 108(3):349–354CrossRefPubMed

24.

Cai Y, Du L, Li F, Gu J, Bai M (2014) Quantification of enhancement of renal parenchymal masses with contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol 40(7):1387–1393CrossRefPubMed

25.

Young JR, Margolis D, Sauk S, et al. (2013) Clear cell renal cell carcinoma: discrimination from other renal cell carcinoma subtypes and oncocytoma at multiphasic multidetector CT. Radiology 267(2):444–453CrossRefPubMed

26.

Cheville JC, Lohse CM, Zincke H, Weaver AL, Blute ML (2003) Comparisons of outcome and prognostic features among histologic subtypes of renal cell carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 27(5):612–624CrossRefPubMed

27.

Olshan AF, Kuo TM, Meyer AM, et al. (2013) Racial difference in histologic subtype of renal cell carcinoma. Cancer Med 2(5):744–749PubMedCentralPubMed

28.

Cohen HT, McGovern FJ (2005) Renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 353(23):2477–2490CrossRefPubMed

29.

Hagenkord JM, Gatalica Z, Jonasch E, Monzon FA (2011) Clinical genomics of renal epithelial tumors. Cancer Genet 204(6):285–297CrossRefPubMed

30.

Reuter VE (2006) The pathology of renal epithelial neoplasms. Semin Oncol 33(5):534–543CrossRefPubMed

31.

Polascik TJ, Bostwick DG, Cairns P (2002) Molecular genetics and histopathologic features of adult distal nephron tumors. Urology 60(6):941–946CrossRefPubMed

32.

Sheir KZ, El-Azab M, Mosbah A, El-Baz M, Shaaban AA (2005) Differentiation of renal cell carcinoma subtypes by multislice computerized tomography. J Urol 174(2):451–455CrossRefPubMed

33.

Kim JK, Kim TK, Ahn HJ, et al. (2002) Differentiation of subtypes of renal cell carcinoma on helical CT scans. Am J Roentgenol 178(6):1499–1506CrossRef

34.

Sun MR, Ngo L, Genega EM, et al. (2009) Renal cell carcinoma: dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging for differentiation of tumor subtypes–correlation with pathologic findings. Radiology 250(3):793–802CrossRefPubMed

35.

Fan L, Lianfang D, Jinfang X, Yijin S, Ying W (2008) Diagnostic efficacy of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in solid renal parenchymal lesions with maximum diameters of 5 cm. J Ultrasound Med 27(6):875–885PubMed

36.

Xu ZF, Xu HX, Xie XY, et al. (2010) Renal cell carcinoma and renal angiomyolipoma: differential diagnosis with real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med 29(5):709–717PubMed

37.

Lu Q, Xue L, Huang B, et al. (2014) Histotype differentiation of hypo-echoic renal tumors on CEUS: usefulness of enhancement homogeneity and intensity. Abdom Imaging. doi:10.1007/s00261-014-0340-5

38.

Lu Q, Li CX, Huang BJ, Xue LY, Wang WP (2015) Triphasic and epithelioid minimal fat renal angiomyolipoma and clear cell renal cell carcinoma: qualitative and quantitative CEUS characteristics and distinguishing features. Abdom Imaging 40(2):333–342CrossRefPubMed

39.

Vikram R, Ng CS, Tamboli P, et al. (2009) Papillary renal cell carcinoma: radiologic–pathologic correlation and spectrum of disease. Radiographics 29(3):741–754CrossRefPubMed

40.

Ruppert-Kohlmayr AJ, Uggowitzer M, Meissnitzer T, Ruppert G (2004) Differentiation of renal clear cell carcinoma and renal papillary carcinoma using quantitative CT enhancement parameters. Am J Roentgenol 183(5):1387–1391CrossRef

41.

Herts BR, Coll DM, Novick AC, et al. (2002) Enhancement characteristics of papillary renal neoplasms revealed on triphasic helical CT of the kidneys. Am J Roentgenol 178(2):367–372CrossRef

42.

Zhang J, Lefkowitz RA, Ishill NM, et al. (2007) Solid renal cortical tumors: differentiation with CT. Radiology 244(2):494–504CrossRefPubMed

43.

Scialpi M, Di Maggio A, Midiri M, et al. (2000) Small renal masses: assessment of lesion characterization and vascularity on dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging with fat suppression. Am J Roentgenol 175(3):751–757CrossRef

44.

Vera-Badillo FE, Conde E, Duran I (2012) Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: a review of an uncommon entity. Int J Urol 19(10):894–900CrossRefPubMed

45.

Kim JI, Cho JY, Moon KC, Lee HJ, Kim SH (2009) Segmental enhancement inversion at biphasic multidetector CT: characteristic finding of small renal oncocytoma. Radiology 252(2):441–448CrossRefPubMed

46.

Rosenkrantz AB, Hindman N, Fitzgerald EF, et al. (2010) MRI features of renal oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol 195(6):W421–W427CrossRef

47.

O’Malley ME, Tran P, Hanbidge A, Rogalla P (2012) Small renal oncocytomas: is segmental enhancement inversion a characteristic finding at biphasic MDCT? Am J Roentgenol 199(6):1312–1315CrossRef

48.

Woo S, Cho JY, Kim SH, et al. (2013) Segmental enhancement inversion of small renal oncocytoma: differences in prevalence according to tumor size. Am J Roentgenol 200(5):1054–1059CrossRef

49.

Schieda N, Al-Subhi M, Flood TA, El-Khodary M, McInnes MD (2014) Diagnostic accuracy of segmental enhancement inversion for the diagnosis of renal oncocytoma using biphasic computed tomography (CT) and multiphase contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Eur Radiol 24(11):2787–2794CrossRefPubMed

50.

Gakis G, Kramer U, Schilling D, et al. (2011) Small renal oncocytomas: differentiation with multiphase CT. Eur J Radiol 80(2):274–278CrossRefPubMed

51.

Tamai H, Takiguchi Y, Oka M, et al. (2005) Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the diagnosis of solid renal tumors. J Ultrasound Med 24(12):1635–1640PubMed

52.

Wu Y, Du L, Li F, et al. (2013) Renal oncocytoma: contrast-enhanced sonographic features. J Ultrasound Med 32(3):441–448PubMed

53.

Halpenny D, Snow A, McNeill G, Torreggiani WC (2010) The radiological diagnosis and treatment of renal angiomyolipoma-current status. Clin Radiol 65(2):99–108CrossRefPubMed

54.

Froemming AT, Boland J, Cheville J, Takahashi N, Kawashima A (2013) Renal epithelioid angiomyolipoma: imaging characteristics in nine cases with radiologic-pathologic correlation and review of the literature. Am J Roentgenol 200(2):W178–W186CrossRef

55.

Jinzaki M, Silverman SG, Akita H, et al. (2014) Renal angiomyolipoma: a radiological classification and update on recent developments in diagnosis and management. Abdom Imaging 39(3):588–604PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

56.

Chaudhry HS, Davenport MS, Nieman CM, Ho LM, Neville AM (2012) Histogram analysis of small solid renal masses: differentiating minimal fat angiomyolipoma from renal cell carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol 198(2):377–383CrossRef

57.

Kim JK, Park SY, Shon JH, Cho KS (2004) Angiomyolipoma with minimal fat: differentiation from renal cell carcinoma at biphasic helical CT. Radiology 230(3):677–684CrossRefPubMed

58.

Yang CW, Shen SH, Chang YH, et al. (2013) Are there useful CT features to differentiate renal cell carcinoma from lipid-poor renal angiomyolipoma? Am J Roentgenol 201(5):1017–1028CrossRef

Titel: Quantitative assessment of solid renal masses by contrast-enhanced ultrasound with time–intensity curves: how we do it
verfasst von: Kevin G. King
Mittul Gulati
Harshawn Malhi
Darryl Hwang
Inderbir S. Gill
Phillip M. Cheng
Edward G. Grant
Vinay A. Duddalwar
Publikationsdatum: 01.10.2015
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 7/2015
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0468-y

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

23.04.2024 | Pankreaskarzinom | Nachrichten

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Quantitative assessment of solid renal masses by contrast-enhanced ultrasound with time–intensity curves: how we do it

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

„Nur wer sich gut aufgehoben fühlt, kann auch für Patientensicherheit sorgen“

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

Update Radiologie

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2015

A novel semi-automatic segmentation method for volumetric assessment of the colon based on magnetic resonance imaging

Cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy: imaging features, current treatment options, and clinical outcomes

Comparison of a pocket-size ultrasound device with a premium ultrasound machine: diagnostic value and time required in bedside ultrasound examination

Errors in imaging the pregnant patient with acute abdomen

The wall-echo-shadow (WES) sign

Suburothelial and extrinsic lesions of the urinary bladder: radiologic and pathologic features with emphasis on MR imaging

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

„Nur wer sich gut aufgehoben fühlt, kann auch für Patientensicherheit sorgen“

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

Update Radiologie