Nierenvolumetrie im Kindesalter: Genauigkeit der dreidimensionalen Sonographie im Vergleich zur konventionellen Sonographie und CT / MRT

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Studienziel: Prospektive Evaluation der Genauigkeit des drei-dimensionalen Ultraschalls (3DUS) bei der Volumetrie der kindlichen Niere im Vergleich zur CT/MRT. Methode: Bei 40 Patienten (Alter: 0 - 17 Jahre) mit einer klinisch indizierten CT/MRT des Abdomens oder des Harntrakts wurde zusätzlich ein 2D- und 3DUS inklusive Volumetrie des Nierenparenchyms durchgeführt. Der 3DUS wurde mit einem speziellen 3DUS-Gerät (Voluson 730, Kretztechnik/GE) oder einem auf Positionssensoren basierenden externen 3D-System (Echotech/GE) unter Verwendung systemeigener Volumetrieprogramme durchgeführt. Die CT/MRT-Daten wurden planimetrisch unter Verwendung der integrierten Systemsoftware volumetriert. Ein allfällig erweitertes NBKS wurde vom Gesamtnierenvolumen subtrahiert. Die mit den verschiedenen Modalitäten gemessenen Volumina wurden miteinander verglichen, das CT/MRT-Volumen diente als Referenzwert. Ergebnisse: Bei 74/77 Nieren war der 3DUS mit diagnostischer Qualität ohne Sedierung durchführbar. Der Vergleich 3DUS mit CT/MRT zeigte eine Genauigkeit von - 2,6 ± 4,4 % bei Nieren ohne Hydronephrosen (2DUS - 3,8 ± 14,7 %) und von + 4,0 ± 5,9 % bei Nieren mit Hydronephrosen (2DUS + 9,6 ± 21,3 %). Die Inter-/Intra-Auswertervariabilität betrug ± 7,3 %/ ± 5,3 %. Schlussfolgerung: Die 3DUS-Nierenvolumetrie ist auch im Kindesalter mit diagnostischer Qualität durchführbar und erlaubt eine mit der CT/MRT vergleichbare Bestimmung des Nierenparenchymvolumens.

Abstract

Purpose: Prospective evaluation of the accuracy of three-dimensional ultrasound (3DUS) to assess the renal parenchymal volume. Materials and Methods: CT, MRI, 2DUS and 3DUS were used to measure the renal volume in 40 patients (range: neonate to 17 years; mean age: 8.95 years). The 3DUS was determined with a Voluson 730 (Kretztechnik, GE) or an external 3D-system (EchoTech, GE) using electromagnetic positioning sensors attached to conventional 2DUS-equipment. The 2DUS volume was calculated with the ellipsoid equation and the 3DUS volume computed with the system integrated software. For CT and MRI, planimetric analysis was used to determine the renal parenchymal volume, whereby the dilated collecting system of a hydronephrosis was subtracted to obtain the real renal parenchymal volume. The results of 2DUS and 3DUS were compared to the results of CT and MRI, and inter- and intraobserver variabilities were calculated. Results: In 74 of 77 kidneys, the 3DUS study was of diagnostic quality. The accuracy of the 3DUS volumes compared well to the CT and MRI volumes with a mean difference of -1.8 ± 4.6 % versus a mean difference of -2.4 ± 15.4 % for 2DUS. In normal kidneys, the accuracy was -2.6 ± 4.4 % for 3DUS and -3.8 ± 14.7 % for 2DUS. In hydronephrosis, the accuracy was +4.0 ± 5.9 % and +9.6 ± 21.3 %, respectively, indicating that 3DUS is more accurate than 2DUS, particularly in kidneys with a dilated collecting system. Inter- and intraobserver variabilities were ± 7.3 % and ± 5.3 %. Conclusion: For assessing the renal parenchymal volume in children, 3DUS is feasible and comparable to CT and MRI.

Literatur

• 1 Bachmann H. Compensatory hypertrophy of the healthy kidney as an important prerequisite for nephrectomy of the small kidney.  Urologe A. 1985;  24 80-83
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 O'Sullivan D C, Dewan P A, Guiney E J. Compensatory hypertrophy effectively assesses the degree of impaired renal function in unilateral renal disease.  Br J Urol. 1992;  69 346-350
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Lavocat M P, Granjon D, Guimpied Y, Dutour N, Allard D, Prevot N, Dubois F. The importance of 99mTc-DMSA renal scintigraphy in the follow-up of acute pyelonephritis in children: comparison with urographic data.  Nucl Med Commun. 1998;  19 703-710
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Rossleigh M A, Farnsworth R H, Leighton D M, Yong J L, Christian C L. Technetium-99m dimercaptosuccinic acid scintigraphy studies of renal cortical scarring and renal length.  J Nucl Med. 1998;  39 1280-1285
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Troell S, Berg U, Johansson B, Wikstad I. Comparison between renal parenchymal sonographic volume, renal parenchymal urographic area, glomerular filtration rate and renal plasma flow in children.  Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1988;  22 207-214
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Sargent M A, Gupta S C. Sonographic measurement of relative renal volume in children: comparison with scintigraphic determination of relative renal function.  Am J Roentgenol. 1993;  161 157-160
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Tubiana M. Carcinogenic effects of low radiation dose.  Cancer Radiother. 1999;  3 203-214
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Brenner D, Elliston C, Hall E, Berdon W. Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT.  Am J Roentgenol. 2001;  176 289-296
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Rosendahl H. Ultrasound screening for fetal urinary tract malformations: a prospective study in general population.  Eur J Obsted Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1990;  36 27-33
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Gunn T R, Mora J D, Pease P. Antenatal diagnosis of urinary tract abnormalities by ultrasonography after 28 weeks gestation.  Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;  172 479-486
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Riccabona M, Nelson T R, Pretorius D H, Davidson T E. Distance and volume measurement using three dimensional ultrasound.  J Ultrasound Med. 1995;  14 881
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Schlogl S, Werner E, Lassmann M, Terekhova J, Muffert S, Seybold S, Reiners C. The use of three-dimensional ultrasound for thyreoid volumetry.  Thyroid. 2001;  11 569-574
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Mahr A, Levegrun S, Bahner M L, Kress J, Zuna I, Schlegel W. Usability of semiautomatic segmentation for tumor volume determination.  Invest Radiol. 1999;  34 143-150
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Nawaratne S, Fabiny R, Brien J E, Zalcberg J, Cosolo W, Whan A, Morgan D J. Accuracy of volume measurement using helical CT.  J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1997;  21 481-486
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Bae K T, Commean P K, Lee J. Volumetric measurement of renal cysts and parenchyma using MRI: phantomas and patients with polycystic kidney disease.  J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2000;  24 614-619
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Tiitola M, Kivisaari L, Tervahartiala P, Palomaki M, Kivisaari R P, Mankinen P, Vehmas T. Estimation or quantification of tumor volume? CT study on irregular phantoms.  Acta Radiol. 2001;  42 101-105
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Monteagudo A, Timor-Tritsch I E, Mayberry P. Three-dimensional transvagina neurosonography of the fetal brain: “navigating” in the volume scan.  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2000;  16 307-313
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Marx G R, Sherwood M C. Three-dimensional echocardiography in congenital hear disease: a continuum of unfilled promises? No. A presently clinically applicable technology with an important future? Yes.  Pediatr Cardiol. 2002;  23 266-285
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Stanojevic M, Hafner T, Kurjak A. Three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound - a useful imaging technique in the assessment of neonatal brain.  Perinat Med. 2002;  30 74-83
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Gilja O H, Smievoll A I, Thune N, Matre K, Hausken T, Odegaard S, Berstad A. In vivo comparison of 3D ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in volume estimation of human kidneys.  Ultrasound Med Biol. 1995;  21 25-32
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Riccabona M, Nelson T R, Pretorius D H, Davidson T E. In vivo three-dimensional sonographic measurement of organ volume: validation in the urinary bladder.  J Ultrasound Med. 1996;  15 627-632
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Kampmann W, Walka M M, Vogel M, Obladen M. 3-D sonographic volume masurement of the cerebral ventricular system: in vitro validation.  Ultrasound Med Biol. 1998;  24 1169-1174
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Lang H, Wolf G K, Prokop M, Nuber B, Weimann A, Raab R, Zoller W G. Three-dimensional ultrasound for volume measurement of liver tumors.  Chirurg. 1999;  70 246-250
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Treece G, Prager R, Gee A, Berman L. 3D ultrasound measurement of large organ volume.  Med Image Anal. 2001;  5 41-54
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Gilmore J H, Gerig G, Specter B, Charles H C, Wilber J S, Hertzberg B S, Kliewer M A. Infant cerebral ventricle volume: a comparision of 3-D ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging.  Ultrasound Med Biol. 2001;  27 1143-1146
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Salerno C C, Pretorius D H, Hilton S W, O'Boyle M K, Hull A D, James G M, Riccabona M, Mannino F, Craft A, Nelson T R. Three-dimensional ultrasonographic imaging of the neonatal brain in high-risk neonates: preliminary study.  J Ultrasound Med. 2000;  19 549-555
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Dinkel E, Ertl M, Dittrich M, Peters H, Berres M, Schulte-Wissermann H. Kidney size in childhood: sonographical growth chart for kidney lenght and volume.  Pediatr Radiol. 1985;  15 38-43
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Riccabona M, Simbrunner J, Ring E, Ruppert-Kohlmayr A, Ebner F, Fotter R. Feasibility of MR urography in neonates and infants with anomalies of the upper urinary tract.  Eur Radiol. 2002;  12 1442-1450
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Sargent M A, Long G, Karmali M, Cheng S M. Interobserver variation in the sonographic estimation of renal volume in children.  Pediatr Radiol. 1997;  27 663-666
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Matre K, Stokke E M, Martens D, Gilja O H. In vitro estimation of kidneys using three-dimensional ultrasonography and a position sensor.  Eur J Ultrasound. 1999;  10 65-73
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Univ. Prof. Dr. Michael Riccabona

Univ. Doz. für Radiologie und Pädiatrie, Univ.-Klinik für Radiologie, Abteilung Kinderradiologie

Auenbruggerplatz 34

8036 Graz

Österreich

Phone: 0043/316/385/84205 oder 4202

Fax: 0043/316/385/4299

Email: michael.riccabona@kfunigraz.ac.at