Differentiation of subtypes of renal cell carcinoma with contrast-enhanced ultrasonography

Multimodality Imaging Features of Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma

Objectives: To describe the US, CEUS, CT, and MRI features of papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC) and to underline the imaging characteristics that are helpful in the differential diagnosis. Methods: Patients with histologically proven papillary renal cell carcinoma who underwent at least two imaging examinations (US, CEUS, CT, and MRI) were included in the study. Tumor size, homogeneity, morphology, perilesional stranding, contrast enhancement locoregional extension were assessed. A comparison and the characteristics of the imaging features for each imaging modality were analyzed. Results: A total of 27 patients with an histologically confirmed diagnosis of PRCC were included in the study. US was highly accurate in distinguishing solid masses from cystic masses, supporting the differential diagnosis of PRCC, as well as in patients with a poor representation of the solid component. CEUS significantly increased diagnostic accuracy in delineating the solid intralesional component. Furthermore, when using CEUS, in the arterial phase, PRCC exhibited hypo-enhancement, and in the late phase it showed an inhomogeneous and delayed wash-out compared with the surrounding renal parenchyma. At MRI, PRCC showed a marked restiction of DWI and was hypointense in the T2-weighted compared to the renal parenchyma. Conclusions: In our study, the characteristic hypodensity and hypoenhancement of PRCC make CT the weakest method of their recognition, while US/CEUS and MRI are necessary to reach a definitive diagnosis. Knowledge of the appearance of PRCC can support an early diagnosis and prompt management, and radiologists should be aware that PRCC, when detected using CT, may resemble spurious non-septate renal cyst.

Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis

This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in diagnosing clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). Literature published in five databases was searched. Twelve studies were included. The pooled results showed sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio of CEUS were 79% (95% CI: 75%-83%), 84% (95% CI: 80%-88%), 4.97 (95% CI: 3.86-6.39), 0.24 (95% CI: 0.20-0.30), and 20.32 (95% CI: 13.84-29.84), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.86. In conclusion, CEUS demonstrates high sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing ccRCC, showing good diagnostic accuracy.

Evaluation of Renal Masses Using Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound with Sonovue and Sonazoid

OBJECTIVE

To explore the differences between SonoVue and Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in evaluating enhancement features of renal masses and determine the diagnostic value of CEUS in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC).

METHODS

A total of 57 eligible patients were enrolled and divided into the ccRCC, papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC), non-ccRCC and non-pRCC malignancy groups, and benign mass groups based on their postsurgical histopathologic diagnosis. The enhancement features of renal masses following SonoVue and Sonazoid CEUS in each group were analyzed. Diagnostic efficiencies of SonoVue and Sonazoid CEUS for ccRCC and non-ccRCC were determined.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the enhancement features of renal masses with SonoVue and Sonazoid imaging in the four groups (p > .05). Both SonoVue CEUS and Sonazoid CEUS showed good diagnostic performance for the differential diagnosis of ccRCC and non-ccRCC, with sensitivities of 88.6% and 85.7%, specificities of 76.5% and 88.2%, accuracies of 84.6% and 86.5%, positive predictive values of 88.6% and 93.8%, and negative predictive values of 76.5% and 75%, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in any of the diagnostic performance indices between the two methods (p > .05).

CONCLUSION

The CEUS features of SonoVue and Sonazoid in evaluating renal masses were similar in the vascular phase. Both SonoVue and Sonazoid CEUS showed good diagnostic performance for the differential diagnosis of ccRCC and non-ccRCC.

Diagnostic Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in Differentiating Malignant from Benign Small Renal Masses After CT/MRI

Background: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in characterizing small renal masses (SRMs) measuring less than 3 cm and in distinguishing between malignant and benign SRMs. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted between January 2022 and January 2023 at the Radiology Department of (Anonymized data), with a total of 43 patients assessed via CT and MRI scans, which were subsequently studied by experienced radiologists who were blinded to the pathology results. The CEUS findings were then compared with histopathological examination outcomes or follow-up imaging results. Results: The study results revealed a notably high level of diagnostic accuracy, with sensitivity at 0.875, specificity at 0.94, positive predictive value at 0.95, and negative predictive value at 0.86 for characterizing SRMs. Spearman rank correlation analysis substantiated a robust positive linear correlation between the CEUS findings and biopsy results (r = 0.972). Conclusions: These findings underscore the potential utility of CEUS as a valuable tool for discriminating between malignant and benign SRMs, carrying significant implications for clinical decision-making and leading to improved patient outcomes. However, larger validation studies are imperative to establish its role in routine clinical practice and to address potential limitations.

Qualitative and quantitative assessment of non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma using contrast-enhanced ultrasound

BACKGROUND

Non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (nccRCC) represents a rare form of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the clinic. It is now understood that contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) exhibits diverse manifestations and can be prone to misdiagnosis. Therefore, summarizing the distinctive features of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography is essential for differentiation from ccRCC.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of qualitative and quantitative CEUS in diagnosing nccRCC to enhance our understanding of this condition.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 21 patients with confirmed nccRCC following surgery and assessed the characteristic conventional ultrasound and CEUS imaging features. The paired Wilcoxon signed-rank sum test was employed to compare differences in CEUS time-intensity curve (TIC) parameters between the lesions and the normal renal cortex.

RESULTS

Routine ultrasound revealed the following primary characteristics in the 21 nccRCC cases: hypoechoic appearance (10/21, 47.6%), absence of liquefaction (18/21, 66.7%), regular shape (19/21, 90.5%), clear boundaries (21/21, 100%), and absence of calcification (17/21, 81%). Color Doppler flow imaging (CDFI) indicated a low blood flow signal (only 1 case of grade III). Qualitative CEUS analysis demonstrated that nccRCC predominantly exhibited slow progression (76.1%), fast washout (57%), uniformity (61.9%), low enhancement (71.5%), and ring enhancement (61.9%). Quantitative CEUS analysis revealed that parameters such as PE, WiAUC, mTTI, WiR, WiPI, WoAUC, WiWoAUC, and WOR in the lesions were significantly lower than those in the normal renal cortex (Z=-3.980, -3.563, -2.427, -3.389, -3.980, -3.493, -3.528, -2.763, P < 0.001, < 0.001, = 0.015, = 0.001, < 0.001, < 0.001, < 0.001, = 0.006). However, there were no significant differences in RT, TTP, FT, or QOF (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

nccRCC exhibits distinctive CEUS characteristics, including slow progression, fast washout, low homogeneity enhancement, and ring enhancement, which can aid in distinguishing nccRCC from ccRCC.

Associations between contrast-enhanced ultrasound features and WHO/ISUP grade of clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CCRCC) comprises 70%-80% of RCCs. The World Health Organization/International Society of Urology Pathology (WHO/ISUP) classification is the most important prognostic factor for CCRCC. By evaluating the variations of tumor microvascular density, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) can noninvasively predict the WHO/ISUP grade of CCRCC, and provide the appropriate treatment plan before clinical operation.

METHODS

In this study, we used CEUS features to analyze 116 CCRCC cases and assess the value of correlation between each indicator and CCRCC WHO/ISUP grading.

RESULTS

When compared to high-grade (WHO/ISUP grade III/IV) tumors, low-grade (WHO/ISUP grade I/II) tumors had reduced relative peak intensity (ΔPI) (P = 0.021), relative area under the curve (ΔAUC) (P = 0.019). However, the frequency of incomplete pseudocapsule (P = 0.021) was significantly higher in high-grade tumors. A cut-off value of mean diameter > 5.5 cm, ΔPI > 304 × 10-3, ΔAUC > 350 × 10-3 allowed identification of high-grade tumors with an area under the curve (AUC) of 74.6%, 71.7%, 70.7%, respectively (95% confidence interval).

CONCLUSIONS

The features of CEUS are effective for differentiating high-grade tumors from low-grade tumors, thus CEUS can be considered an acceptable method for the preoperative assessment of tumor grade.

Qualitative and quantitative characteristics of CEUS for renal cell carcinoma and angiomyolipoma: a narrative review

Incidental findings of renal masses are increasing. However, a substantial portion of surgically treated renal masses turn out to be benign on histopathological examination. Thus, there is a clear need for improved pre-surgical assessment to minimize unnecessary invasive procedures. The challenge intensifies when distinguishing between renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and angiomyolipoma (AML) in renal lesions smaller than 4 cm with minimal adipose tissue. In such cases, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has emerged as a valuable diagnostic tool, by utilizing both qualitative and quantitative parameters. Quantitative measures offer objectivity, reliability, and reproducibility compared to qualitative parameters, enabling the characterization of RCC subtypes and differentiation from AML. Qualitative features as enhancement pattern, degree, and peak were less helpful in distinguishing triphasic minimal fat AML (TAML) from epithelioid AML (EAML), with the pseudocapsule sign potentially being the only distinguishing qualitative feature. The pseudocapsule sign was more frequently observed in ccRCCs (38.0%) than in AMLs (15.6%). Moreover, it was detected in 40.0% of EAMLs and 34.5% of ccRCCs but not in TAMLs due to similar growth patterns between EAMLs and low-grade ccRCCs. Quantitative measures such as the time-to-peak (TTP) ratio can further enhance diagnostic accuracy and also TOC ratio should be considered, as it was higher in clear cell RCCs (ccRCCs) and in EAMLs compared to TAMLs, indicating behavior similar to ccRCCs. However, CEUS remains an operator-dependent exam.

Qualitative Assessment of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in Differentiating Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma and Oncocytoma

BACKGROUND

We aimed to assess whether clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) can be differentiated from renal oncocytoma (RO) on a contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS).

METHODS

Between January 2021 and October 2022, we retrospectively queried and analyzed our prospectively maintained dataset. Renal mass features were scrutinized with conventional ultrasound imaging (CUS) and CEUS. All lesions were confirmed by histopathologic diagnoses after nephron-sparing surgery (NSS). A multivariable analysis was performed to identify the potential predictors of ccRCC. The area under the curve (AUC) was depicted in order to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the multivariable model.

RESULTS

A total of 126 renal masses, including 103 (81.7%) ccRCC and 23 (18.3%) RO, matched our inclusion criteria. Among these two groups, we found significant differences in terms of enhancement (homogeneous vs. heterogeneous) (p < 0.001), wash-in (fast vs. synchronous/slow) (p = 0.004), wash-out (fast vs. synchronous/slow) (p = 0.001), and rim-like enhancement (p < 0.001). On the multivariate logistic regression, heterogeneous enhancement (OR: 19.37; p = <0.001) and rim-like enhancement (OR: 3.73; p = 0.049) were independent predictors of ccRCC. Finally, these two variables had an AUC of 82.5% and 75.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic imaging for presurgical planning is crucial in the choice of either conservative or radical management. CEUS, with its unique features, revealed its usefulness in differentiating ccRCC from RO.

Comparative diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for differentiating clear cell and non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To compare the diagnostic efficiency of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with that of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) for the differential diagnosis of clear and non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma, as confirmed by subsequent pathology.

METHODS

A total of 181 patients with 184 renal lesions diagnosed by both CEUS and DCE-MRI were enrolled in the study, including 136 clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) and 48 non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (non-ccRCC) tumors. All lesions were confirmed by histopathologic diagnosis after surgical resection. Interobserver agreement was estimated using a weighted kappa statistic. Diagnostic efficiency in evaluating ccRCC and non-ccRCC was compared between CEUS and DCE-MRI.

RESULTS

The weighted kappa value for interobserver agreement was 0.746 to 0.884 for CEUS diagnosis and 0.764 to 0.895 for DCE-MRI diagnosis. Good diagnostic performance in differential diagnosis of ccRCC and non-ccRCC was displayed by both CEUS and DCE-MRI: sensitivity was 89.7% and 91.9%, respectively; specificity was 77.1% and 68.8%, respectively; and area under the receiver operating curve was 0.834 and 0.803, respectively. No statistically significant differences were present between the two methods (p = 0.54).

CONCLUSIONS

Both CEUS and DCE-MRI imaging are effective for the differential diagnosis of ccRCC and non-ccRCC. Thus, CEUS could be an alternative to DCE-MRI as a first test for patients at risk of renal cancer, particularly where DCE-MRI cannot be carried out.

KEY POINTS

• CEUS and DCE-MRI features can help differentiate ccRCC and non-ccRCC. • The differential diagnosis of ccRCC and non-ccRCC by CEUS is comparable to that of DCE-MRI. • Interobserver agreement is generally high using CEUS and DCE-MRI.

Diagnostic Value of Qualitative and Quantitative Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound for Pathological Subtypes of Small Solid Renal Masses

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic value of qualitative and quantitative contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) for pathological subtypes of small solid renal masses (sSRMs).

METHODS

Patients with sSRMs confirmed by surgical pathology from January 2019 to November 2021 were retrospectively identified. All patients were divided into 3 groups: clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) group, none-ccRCC group (renal cell carcinoma other than ccRCC), and angiomyolipoma (AML) group. The mass position, size, echogenicity and blood flow signals were compared. The speed of wash-in, wash-out, the degree of peak enhancement and the homogeneity at peak enhancement, the presence of pseudocapsule sign in CEUS imaging were qualitatively evaluated. Peak enhancement, wash-in area under the curve (WiAUC), rise time, time to peak, wash-in rate (WiR), wash-in perfusion index (WiPI) and tumor-to-cortex enhancement ratio of the above parameters in CEUS imaging were quantitatively evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 105 patients, 105 sSRMs (66 ccRCC, 18 none-ccRCC, 21 AML) were enrolled in this study. No significant differences were found on location, size and echogenicity among 3 groups (all P > .05). The proportion of fast-washout and hypo-enhancement were highest in none-ccRCC group. Heterogeneous enhancement was detected in 87.88% in ccRCC group which is significantly higher than other 2 groups. Hundred percent of the AML showed no pseudocapsule sign, which is the highest among the 3 groups. Peak enhancement, WiAUC, WiR, WiPI of ccRCC group were the highest among the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Qualitative and quantitative CEUS not only has the diagnostic value in distinguishing AML from malignant sSRMs, but also helps to differentiate the pathological subtypes of sSRMs.

Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound characteristics of renal tumors: VueBox™ quantitative analysis

BACKGROUND

VueBoxtrademark has been used for contrast analysis in DCE-US-based quantitative research.

OBJECTIVE

Aim of this study was to use the enhancement-mode and VueBoxtrademark parameters to further evaluate the differential diagnostic value of DCE-US for renal tumors.

METHODS

24 patients with renal tumors, including 7 benign and 17 malignant, were retrospectively analyzed.The DCE-US enhancement-mode and VueBoxtrademark parameters correlated with the histological analyses of tumors were obtained and analyzed.

RESULTS

The benign and malignant renal tumors showed significant differences in enhancement degree (P = 0.017) and presence of a pseudocapsule (P = 0.009) and in the VueBoxtrademark parameters FT (P = 0.045) and RT (P = 0.039). Receiver operating characteristic analysis for differential diagnosis of benign and malignant renal tumors showed that AUC for a combination of enhancement degree and presence of a pseudocapsule was greater (AUC = 0.815) than the values for either parameter of enhancement mode alone. Similarly, the AUC for a combination of RT and FT was greater (AUC = 0.798) than the values for RT or FT alone. A comprehensive index obtaining by combining the enhancement-mode and VueBoxtrademark parameters showed the largest AUC (AUC = 0.916) with relatively high accuracy (87.50%), sensitivity (76.50%), and specificity (85.70%).

CONCLUSIONS

DCE-US with enhancement mode and quantitative analysis can facilitate preoperative differential diagnosis of benign and malignant renal tumors.

Extraosseous Ewing's sarcoma/peripheral primitive neuroectodermal tumour of the kidney: a case report and literature review

BACKGROUND

Extraosseous Ewing's sarcoma/peripheral primitive neuroectodermal tumours(EWS/pPNETs) of the kidney are rare. Signs and symptoms are atypical in EWS patients. Presenting symptoms include haematuria, abdominal pain, or a palpable mass. A comprehensive review of the literature shows that it is difficult to make an accurate diagnosis based on physical examination alone. The imaging findings of EWS/pPNETs are nonspecific. We used contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) to diagnose an EWS/pPNET in our patient, which had never been reported previously to our knowledge.

CASE PRESENTATION

This article reports the case of a 20-year-old female with an abdominal mass and gross haematuria for 1 month. The ultrasound revealed a hypoechoic mass with a clear margin at the lower pole in the left kidney. CEUS demonstrated signs of annular enhancement and heterogeneous enhancement of the tumour, and simultaneous wash-in was predominant. Computed tomography images showed an elliptical low-density tumour. The patient underwent a left kidney resection, and the pathological diagnosis was an EWS/pPNET. Twenty-one days after the kidney operation, the patient underwent 8 cycles of a CAV (vinorelbine, ifosfamide, epirubicin) + IE (isocyclophosphamide, etoposide) chemotherapy regimen. Subsequently, radiotherapy (dose: 45 Gy, radiation field:the tumour bed following surgical resection) was administered for nearly 30 days. The patient had no signs of local recurrence or metastasis within a follow-up of 4 years.

CONCLUSIONS

As a radiation-free, inexpensive, convenient, and repeatable examination method, ultrasound was the primary choice for kidney examination. Early CEUS was helpful to make an accurate diagnosis. Surgery and adjuvant radiation or chemotherapy administered in a timely manner can prevent further deterioration.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound manifestations of renal masses undetectable on conventional ultrasound

This study aimed to retrospectively analyze the features of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) of renal masses that cannot be detected by conventional ultrasound (CUS). The data of 264 patients who underwent CEUS for renal lesions from January 2016 to December 2019 were retrieved. Of these, 16 patients with renal masses which were not detected by CUS were included in the final analysis. The corresponding characteristics of CEUS were evaluated, including intensity of enhancement, homogeneity, wash-in and wash-out patterns, and perilesional rim-like enhancement. Of the 16 patients, 10 patients had clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) and 6 patients had urothelial carcinoma of the renal pelvis (UCRP). Compared with the location on non-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan, all tumors were detected on CEUS. Most (7/10) of the ccRCCs appeared as hyperenhancement, homogeneous enhancement, synchronous-in, and no perilesional rim-like enhancement. Most (4/6) of the UCRPs appeared as isoenhancement, slow-in, fast-out, and no perilesional rim-like enhancement. CEUS may be helpful in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of renal tumors which were not observed on CUS, and it might be an alternative method for some patients when contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) cannot be performed.

The Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in Diagnosing Small Renal Cell Carcinoma Subtypes and Angiomyolipoma

OBJECTIVES

To retrospectively explore the value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in differentiating small renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) from angiomyolipomas (AMLs), and distinguishing between clear cell RCC (ccRCC), papillary RCC (pRCC), and chromophobe RCC (chRCC).

METHODS

A total of 151 patients with small renal masses (110 ccRCCs, 12 pRCCs, 9 chRCCs, and 20 AMLs) were enrolled between August 2016 and October 2019.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in terms of enhancement intensity (EI), enhancement homogeneity, perilesional rim-like enhancement (PRE), wash in, and wash out (WO) between RCC and AML (P = .000, .011, .000, .001, .000, respectively). Although there was no significant difference in EI between pRCC and chRCC (P = .272), EI of ccRCC was higher than that of pRCC (P = .000) and chRCC (P = .010). Multivariate regression analysis showed PRE and fast WO were related to RCC (OR = 18.189, 15.141, respectively). Although there were no significant differences in the sensitivity and area under the curve (AUC) between PRE and fast WO (95.0% vs. 95.0%, P = 1.000 and .880 vs. 0.799, P = .123, respectively), the specificity of PRE in predicting RCC was higher than that of fast WO (80.92% vs. 64.89%, P = .011). The sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of the two characteristics combination for differentiating RCC from AML were 95.0%, 90.8%, and 0.920, respectively, and that of EI for differentiating between ccRCC, pRCC, and chRCC were 81.0%, 78.2%, and 0.796, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

CEUS has value in differentiating small RCCs from AMLs and distinguishing ccRCC, a subtype associated with a greater likelihood of malignant behavior from pRCC and chRCC.

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

Papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) represents the second most common subtype of renal cell carcinoma, following clear cell carcinoma and accounting for 10-15% of cases. For around 20 years, pRCCs have been classified according to their mere histopathologic appearance, unsupported by genetic and molecular evidence, with an unmet need for clinically relevant classification. Moreover, patients with non-clear cell renal cell carcinomas have been seldom included in large clinical trials; therefore, the therapeutic landscape is less defined than in the clear cell subtype. However, in the last decades, the evolving comprehension of pRCC molecular features has led to a growing use of target therapy and to better oncological outcomes. Nonetheless, a reliable molecular biomarker able to detect the aggressiveness of pRCC is not yet available in clinical practice. As a result, the pRCC correct prognosis remains cumbersome, and new biomarkers able to stratify patients upon risk of recurrence are strongly needed. Non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) are functional elements which play critical roles in gene expression, at the epigenetic, transcriptional, and post-transcriptional levels. In the last decade, ncRNAs have gained importance as possible biomarkers for several types of diseases, especially in the cancer universe. In this review, we analyzed the role of long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) in the prognosis of pRCC, with a particular focus on their networking. In fact, in the competing endogenous RNA hypothesis, lncRNAs can bind miRNAs, resulting in the modulation of the mRNA levels targeted by the sponged miRNA, leading to additional regulation of the target gene expression and increasing complexity in the biological processes.

Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the Evaluation of Renal Masses with Histopathological Validation—Results from a Prospective Single-Center Study

Background: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in characterizing between malignant and benign renal lesions confirmed by histological examination. Methods: Overall, 110 patients, for a total of 118 renal masses previously identified at CT and MRI underwent CEUS. An expert radiologist evaluated morphological, qualitative and quantitative parameters. Acquired data were analyzed to assess the value of each parameter to differentiate between malignant and benign lesions. Results: Histological results of 118 renal masses showed 88 (75%) malignant lesions and 30 (25%) benign lesions. Among morphological features, inhomogeneous echogenicity was the best predictor of malignancy depicting a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 76%, 76%, 88% and 57%, respectively. Among qualitative parameters, the most reliable parameter was the presence of pseudo-capsule. Here, sensitivity, specificity, positive PPV and NPV were 85%, 86%, 94% and 71%, respectively. Among quantitative parameters, the most reliable parameters were peak intensity (PI) and the area under the (AUC) with sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV values of 94%, 92%, 96% and 87% and 99%, 92%, 97% and 97%, respectively. Finally, the most reliable parameters were combined to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. The best combination obtained was restricted to CEUS parameters (PI and AUC). Here, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy rate were 93%, 100%, 100%, 83% and 93%, respectively. Conclusions: CEUS increases the US accuracy to discriminate between benign and malignant renal lesions.

Expanding the Role of Ultrasound for the Characterization of Renal Masses

The incidental detection of renal masses has been steadily rising. As a significant proportion of renal masses that are surgically treated are benign or indolent in nature, there is a clear need for better presurgical characterization of renal masses to minimize unnecessary harm. Ultrasound is a widely available and relatively inexpensive real-time imaging technique, and novel ultrasound-based applications can potentially aid in the non-invasive characterization of renal masses. Evidence acquisition: We performed a narrative review on novel ultrasound-based techniques that can aid in the non-invasive characterization of renal masses. Evidence synthesis: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) adds significant diagnostic value, particularly for cystic renal masses, by improving the characterization of fine septations and small nodules, with a sensitivity and specificity comparable to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Additionally, the performance of CEUS for the classification of benign versus malignant renal masses is comparable to that of computed tomography (CT) and MRI, although the imaging features of different tumor subtypes overlap significantly. Ultrasound molecular imaging with targeted contrast agents is being investigated in preclinical research as an addition to CEUS. Elastography for the assessment of tissue stiffness and micro-Doppler imaging for the improved detection of intratumoral blood flow without the need for contrast are both being investigated for the characterization of renal masses, though few studies have been conducted and validation is lacking. Conclusions: Several novel ultrasound-based techniques have been investigated for the non-invasive characterization of renal masses. CEUS has several advantages over traditional grayscale ultrasound, including the improved characterization of cystic renal masses and the potential to differentiate benign from malignant renal masses to some extent. Ultrasound molecular imaging offers promise for serial disease monitoring and the longitudinal assessment of treatment response, though this remains in the preclinical stages of development. While elastography and emerging micro-Doppler techniques have shown some encouraging applications, they are currently not ready for widespread clinical use.

The quantitative evaluation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the differentiation of small renal cell carcinoma subtypes and angiomyolipoma

Background

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has been widely used for renal lesion diagnosis and differential diagnosis. However, qualitative analysis of CEUS is subject to examinations with low reproducibility. This study aims to investigate the diagnostic value of CEUS quantitative parameters in differentiating small renal cell carcinoma (RCC) subtypes and angiomyolipoma (AML).

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on 97 cases of a small renal mass undergoing a CEUS before a radical or partial nephrectomy procedure. A region of interest (ROI) was placed in the tumor's maximum enhanced region (ROI_max) as much as possible, and adjacent renal cortex (ROI_refer) was selected from normal renal tissue around a mass of the same depth. The time-intensity curve (TIC) was used to analyze the ROI_max and the ROI_refer of the tumors quantitatively. Then the parameters of the ROI_max and the ROI_refer, including the differences between the parameters of the ROI_max and the ROI_refer, were analyzed statistically.

Results

In RCC and clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), the peak intensity (PI), slope (SL), area under the curve (AUC), area under the wash-in curve (AWI), area under the wash-out curve (AWO), time to peak intensity (TTP) and the mean transit time (MTT) were statistically significant between ROI_max and ROI_refer (all P=0.000). The △PI (△PI = PI_max - PI_refer), △SL (△SL = SL_max - SL_refer), △AUC (△AUC = AUC_max - AUC_refer), △AWI (△AWI = AWI_max - AWI_refer) and △AWO (△AWO = AWO_max - AWO_refer) of RCC were significantly higher than in AML (P=0.007, 0.000, 0.003, 0.048, 0.009, respectively), while the TTP (△TTP = TTP_max - TTP_refer) and △MTT (△MTT = MTT_max - MTT_refer) of RCC were significantly lower (both P=0.000). In comparison with papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC), the △PI, △SL, △AUC and △AWO of ccRCC were all larger (all P<0.05). The sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of the combination of parameter difference for differentiating RCC from AML were 100%, 81.2%, and 0.965, respectively, and for differentiating ccRCC from pRCC and chRCC, 85.71%, 85.92% and 0.911, respectively.

Conclusions

CEUS quantitative parameters have value in differentiating small RCC from AML and distinguishing ccRCC from pRCC and chRCC.

The value of real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasound combined with CT enhancement in the differentiation of subtypes of renal cell carcinoma

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the value of real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) combined with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) in the differential diagnosis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CCRCC), papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC), and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (CRCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the present study, 82 patients with CCRCC, 24 patients with PRCC, and 19 patients with CRCC were confirmed by pathology of the resected tumor. All patients were evaluated by CEUS and CECT before the operation. In addition, the contrast enhancement mode of CEUS and CECT and the contrast parameters of the region of interest (ROI) time-intensity curve between the lesions and the surrounding normal renal parenchyma by CEUS were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

Compared with the pathological results, the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in the 3 groups was 87.8% (72/82), 83.3% (20/24) and 73.7% (14/19). There was no significant difference between CEUS and CECT in the diagnostic accuracy of all groups (P>0.05). Meanwhile, compared with the surrounding renal parenchyma by CEUS, 82.5% (66/80) of CCRCC lesions showed "fast-forward and fast/slow-retrograde," while 83.3% (20/24) of PRCC, and 84.2% (16/19) showed "slow-forward and fast/slow-retrograde." Significant differences in the enhancement modes of CEUS were found among the CCRCC, PRCC, and CRCC lesions (P < 0.05). And the enhancement modes could be quantitatively analyzed by the ROI time-intensity curve of the lesion. Moreover, lesions enhanced by CECT and 74.4% (61/82) of CCRCC lesions showed "fast-forward and fast/slow-retrograde," while 66.7% (16/24) of PRCC and 84.2% (16/19) of CRCC showed "slow-forward and fast/slow-retrograde." The contrast modes and enhancement uniformity of CEUS and CECT showed no significant differences among the CCRCC, PRCC, and CRCC lesions (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

CEUS and quantitative analysis of ROI time-intensity curve can be used for differential diagnosis of the 3 RCC subtypes. The combination of CEUS and CECT can help us differentiate RCC subtypes and is of great significance for clinical treatment strategies and prognostication.

Predictive value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound combined with conventional ultrasound in solid renal parenchymal lesions

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to develop a model to predict the risk of malignancy in solid renal parenchymal lesions based on the imaging features of combined conventional and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS).

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed among patients with focal solid renal parenchymal lesions on ultrasound images. Ultrasound features were characterized by two experienced radiologists independently. A multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the most relevant features and to estimate the risk of malignancy. Scoring and counting methods were developed based on the most relevant features. The diagnostic performance was evaluated by the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

RESULTS

A total of 519 renal lesions were included in this study. The conventional ultrasound features of diameter, echogenicity, hypoechoic rim and the CEUS feature of heterogeneity were identified as the most relevant features for prediction of malignancy. The sensitivity and specificity for the logistic regression model, the scoring method and the counting method were 95.3 and 93.4%, 93.8 and 87.8%, 88.8 and 93.9%, respectively. The logistic model had the best performance for diagnosing malignant renal lesions with AUC of 0.978, compared with the scoring method and the counting method with AUCs of 0.958 and 0.965.

CONCLUSION

The combination of contrast-enhanced ultrasound with conventional ultrasound improved the diagnostic performance of solid renal lesions based on the logistic regression model.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

In this study, we revealed that the combination of CEUS and conventional ultrasound provided higher accuracy for diagnosing malignant renal tumors.

Metanephric adenoma: association between the imaging features of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and clinicopathological characteristics

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to improve the understanding of metanephric adenoma (MA) by retrospective analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) findings and clinicopathological characteristics of MAs.

METHODS

Gray-scale ultrasound (US) and CEUS findings of 7 adult MA patients, confirmed by postoperative pathology, were summarized via collection of clinicopathological and ultrasonographic imaging data, including tumor location, size, echo intensity, color flow, presence or absence of calcification, and liquefactive necrosis, contrast-enhanced pattern, enhancement characteristics, and contrast wash-out compared with adjacent parenchyma, and the presence or absence of a pseudocapsule. Histopathological analyses, including hematoxylin and eosin (HE) and immunohistochemical (IHC) staining, were conducted with the EnVision method.

RESULTS

All 7 participants were female, aged 29-73 years (mean age, 54 years), with flank pain (3/7). All tumors were solid (7/7) with sizes of 2.0-5.0 cm (mean diameter, 3.07 cm), including 4 in the left kidney, 3 in the right kidney, 2 in the renal pelvis, and 5 in the renal parenchyma. On the gray-scale US, MA was shown as hypoechoic (4/7), slightly hyperechoic (2/7), isoechoic (1/7), and with a defined border. The morphology was regular and rounded (7/7), internal echogenicity was homogeneous (5/7), and no calcification was seen (7/7). The CEUS showed clear boundaries (7/7), homogeneous isodensity (5/7), with calcification (0/7), necrosis (2/11), heterogeneous hyperattenuation (2/7), pseudocapsule (2/7), and medullary phase fast wash-out (7/7). The surgical methods were radical nephrectomy (4/7) and partial nephrectomy (3/7). The duration of follow-up period for all participants was 3-74 months, and no local or distant recurrences were found. The IHC staining showed that most tumor cells were positive for WT1, cytokeratins AE1/AE3, vimentin, and CD57, and exhibited focal positivity for CK7, while negative for CD10, AMACR, and CK720. The proliferative index (Ki-67) was 2-3%.

CONCLUSIONS

On gray-scale US, MA appears as a solid nodule with a well-defined boundary, regular morphology, and homogeneous echogenicity; CEUS shows slow progression and slightly lower homogeneous enhancement and fast wash-out in the medullary phase. These findings may provide insight into the progression of MA and aid in the development of diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.

Contrast -Enhanced Ultrasound: State of the Art in North America

The Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound convened a panel of specialists in contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) to produce a white paper on noncardiac CEUS in North America. The panel met in Chicago, Illinois, on October 24 and 25, 2017. The recommendations are based on analysis of current literature and common practice strategies and are thought to represent a reasonable approach to introduce the advantages of this safe and noninvasive technique for the benefit of our patients. Characterization of liver nodules, and pediatric vascular and intravesicular applications comprise the approved indications for CEUS in the United States. They, along with the very successful off-label use of CEUS for the kidney, are included in this publication.Other off-label uses are presented with emphasis on their value and literature support in the online version.

A comparative study of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and contrast-enhanced CT for the detection and characterization of renal masses

This study aims to compare the value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant renal masses. Included in this retrospective study were 143 renal masses in 141 patients using histopathological findings as the gold standard. A comparison was made of the two modalities in image characteristics for their accuracy in the differential diagnosis of renal masses. CEUS and CECT were both used for 39 masses in 37 patients, with 31 (79.5%) being malignant and 8 (20.5%) benign. The differences between the benign and malignant groups in perfusion intensity, perfusion uniformity and entry and exit of the contrast agent were not statistically significant (P > 0.05). However, CEUS could better display the circular perfusion of renal cell carcinoma than CECT (P < 0.05). CECT alone detected 109 masses in 107 patients, with 93 (85.3%) being malignant and 16 (14.7%) benign. CEUS detected 73 masses in 71 patients, with 56 (76.7%) being malignant and 17 (23.3%) benign. No statistically significant differences were observed between CEUS and CECT in the diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma (92.8% vs. 90.3%), with a specificity of 52.9% vs. 31.2%, an accuracy of 83.5% vs. 81.6%, and a positive predictive value of 86.7% vs. 88.4% or a negative predictive value of 69.2% vs. 35.7% (P > 0.05 for all). These results suggested both CEUS and CECT are highly valuable in the differential diagnosis of renal masses, and CEUS can be used as an important supplement for CECT in diagnosis of renal cancer.

Quantification of contrast-uptake as imaging biomarker for disease progression of renal cell carcinoma after tumor ablation

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) depends greatly on the presence of extra-renal metastases.

PURPOSE

To investigate the value of total tumor volume (TTV) and enhancing tumor volume (ETV) as three-dimensional (3D) quantitative imaging biomarkers for disease aggressiveness in patients with RCC.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective, HIPAA-compliant, IRB-approved study including 37 patients with RCC treated with image-guided thermal ablation during 2007-2015. TNM stage, RENAL Nephrometry Score, largest tumor diameter, TTV, and ETV were assessed on cross-sectional imaging at baseline and correlated with outcome measurements. The primary outcome was time-to-occurrence of extra-renal metastases and the secondary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). Correlation was assessed using a Cox regression model and differences in outcomes were shown by Kaplan-Meier plots with significance and odds ratios (OR) calculated by Log-rank test/generalized Wilcoxon and continuity-corrected Woolf logit method.

RESULTS

Patients with a TTV or ETV > 5 cm³ were more likely to develop distant metastases compared to patients with TTV (OR 6.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-134.4, P=0.022) or ETV (OR 8.48, 95% CI 0.42-170.1, P=0.016) < 5 cm³. Additionally, PFS was significantly worse in patients with larger ETV (P = 0.039; median PFS 51.87 months vs. 69.97 months). In contrast, stratification by median value of the established, caliper-based measurements showed no significant correlation with outcome parameters.

CONCLUSION

ETV, as surrogate of lesion vascularity, is a sensitive imaging biomarker for occurrence of extra-renal metastatic disease and PFS in patients with RCC.

Routine or enhanced imaging to differentiate between type 1 and type 2 papillary renal cell carcinoma

AIM

To investigate imaging features and differentiating qualities of type 1 and type 2 papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) by different imaging techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2007 to 2019, 107 patients with type 1 pRCC (T1-pRCC) and 147 with type 2 pRCC (T2-pRCC) were included in this retrospective study. All patients underwent conventional ultrasound (US); some also underwent contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), or contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI). Tumour Fuhrman grade or World Health Organization (WHO)/International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade (after June 2016) and invasive ranges were recorded. The two types of pRCC were analysed and compared for imaging features including tumour position, size, margin, echo type, and colour Doppler flow imaging (CDFI) using US as well as enhanced features from CEUS, CECT, or CE-MRI.

RESULTS

T2-pRCC showed a higher Fuhrman grade (p<0.001) and greater propensity to invade extrarenal tissue (p<0.001) than T1-pRCC. On US imaging, T2-pRCC was more likely to be a cystic-solid lesion (p<0.001), and colour flow with a higher resistance index (RI; p=0.014) was more easily detected (p=0.001) in T2-pRCC than in T1-pRCC. Within contrast-enhanced examinations, more T2-pRCC lesions had blurred tumour borders (p=0.003), hypervascular characteristics (p=0.003), and heterogeneous enhancement (p<0.001) than those of T1-pRCC.

CONCLUSIONS

T2-pRCC manifests more aggressively than T1-pRCC. T2-pRCC has a higher proportion of hypervascular and heterogeneous enhancement than T1-RCC.

Ratio of maximum to minimum tumor diameter can predict the pathology type of renal cell carcinoma before surgery

INTRODUCTION

Previous reports have described several methods and markers used to distinguish pathologic subtypes of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This study aimed to evaluate the utility of the ratio of maximum to minimum tumor diameter (ROD) in predicting pathologic subtypes of RCC.

METHODS

Data from patients with RCC who underwent surgery between January 2015 and December 2019 were reviewed retrospectively. The cutoff value for ROD was calculated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

RESULTS

In the clear cell RCC (ccRCC) and non-ccRCC groups, the optimal ROD cutoff value to predict ccRCC was determined to be 1.201 (sensitivity, 90.7%; specificity, 76.1%; area under the ROC curve [AUC], 0.827; p < 0.001). In the non-ccRCC group, the cutoff value for ROD in predicting papillary RCC was 1.092 (sensitivity, 87.9%; specificity, 40.5%; AUC, 0.637; p = 0.003). Compared with patients with ROD <1.201, more patients in the ccRCC group exhibited tumors with an ROD ⩾1.201 (14.2% versus 85.8%, respectively; p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis of preoperative features revealed that ROD ⩾1.201 was an independent predictive factor for ccRCC. In addition, patients with ROD ⩾1.201 had higher percentages of Fuhrman grade III/IV (91.2% versus 8.8%; p = 0.014), tumor necrosis (86.7% versus 13.3%; p = 0.012) and sarcomatoid differentiation (90.6% versus 9.4%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

ROD was a novel indicator for preoperatively predicting histologic type in patients with RCC. ROD cutoff values of 1.201 and 1.092 were the most discriminative for ccRCC and papillary RCC, respectively. Moreover, ROD ⩾1.201 was associated with high Fuhrman grade, sarcomatoid features, and tumor necrosis.

Differentiation of renal cell carcinoma subtypes through MRI-based radiomics analysis

OBJECTIVES

To explore whether clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC), and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (cRCC) can be distinguished using radiomics features extracted from magnetic resonance (MR) images.

METHODS

Seventy-seven patients (ccRCC = 32, pRCC = 23, cRCC = 22) underwent MRI before surgery between May 2013 and August 2018 in this retrospective study. Thirty-nine radiomics features were extracted from tumor volumes on three sequences (T2WI, EN-T1WI CMP, and EN-T1WI NP). The Kruskal-Wallis test with Bonferonni correction and variance threshold were used for feature selection among the three RCC subtypes. ROC curves for the three subtypes were generated based on radiomics features. AUC, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for subtype differentiation are reported. Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) was used to assess the discriminative ability of these radiomics features.

RESULTS

Significant radiomics features among the three subtypes were identified, and ROC curves achieved excellent AUCs for T2WI, EN-T1WI CMP, EN-T1WI NP, and combined three MR sequences (0.631, 0.790, 0.959, and 0.959 between ccRCC and cRCC; 0.688, 0.854, 0.909, and 0.955 between pRCC and cRCC; 0.747, 0.810, 0.814, and 0.890 between ccRCC and pRCC). In addition, LDA demonstrated the three RCC subtypes were correctly classified by radiomics analysis (66.2% for EN-T1WI CMP, 71.4% for EN-T1WI NP, 55.8% for T2WI, and 71.4% for the combined three MR sequences).

CONCLUSIONS

Radiomics analysis can be used to differentiate among ccRCC, pRCC, and cRCC based on radiomics features extracted from multiple-sequence MRI and may help diagnose and treat RCC patients in the future, while further study is still needed.

KEY POINTS

• Radiomics features on multiple-sequence MRI can help differentiate the three subtypes of renal cell carcinoma (clear cell, papillary renal cell, and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma). • Radiomics features based on MRI indicate greater textural heterogeneity on ccRCCs than pRCCs and cRCCs (the highest AUCs on EN-T1WI NP are 0.814 for ccRCCs vs pRCCs and 0.959 for ccRCCs vs cRCCs, respectively). • There is a significant difference in the textural heterogeneity of radiomics features between pRCCs and cRCCs (the AUC is 0.909, 0.854, and 0.688 on EN-T1WI NP, EN-T1WI CMP, and T2WI, respectively).

The independent indicators for differentiating renal cell carcinoma from renal angiomyolipoma by contrast-enhanced ultrasound

Background

The value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in differentiating between renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and angiomyolipoma (AML) was analyzed. The purpose of this study was to identify the independent indicators of CEUS for predicting RCC.

Methods

A total of 172 renal tumors (150 RCCs, 22 AMLs) in 165 patients underwent conventional ultrasound (CUS) and CEUS examinations before radical or partial nephrectomy, and the features on CUS and CEUS were analyzed.

Results

There were significant differences in echogenicity, blood flow signals in color Doppler flow imaging (CDFI), peak intensity, homogeneity of enhancement, wash in, wash out, and perilesional rim-like enhancement between RCC and AML (P < 0.05 for all). Multivariate analysis indicated that perilesional rim-like enhancement (P = 0.035, odds ratio [OR] = 9.907, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.169–83.971) and fast wash out (P = 0.001, OR = 9.755, 95%[CI]: 2.497–38.115) were independent indicators for predicting RCC. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) for perilesional rim-like enhancement was 0.838 (95% CI: 0.774–0.890) with 76.7% sensitivity and 90.9% specificity, while the AUC of fast wash out was 0.833 (95% CI:0.768–0.885) with 74.7% sensitivity and 81.8% specificity.

Conclusions

This study indicated that CEUS has value in differentiating RCC and AML. Present perilesional rim-like enhancement and fast wash out may be important indicators for predicting RCC.

Renal Masses: Evaluation with Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound, with a Special Focus on the Pseudocapsule Sign

The aim of this study was to analyze the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in differentiating between benign and malignant renal masses, with a special emphasis on the value of the pseudocapsule sign. A total of 163 consecutive patients with 163 renal masses were involved. The conventional ultrasonography and CEUS features were assessed. Sensitivity, specificity and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (Az) were calculated for qualitative CEUS, and a multivariate analysis was performed to analyze the correlation between the sonographic features and malignancy. Time to peak (TTP) and peak intensity (PI) were compared between benign and malignant renal masses for quantitative CEUS analysis in 72 of 163 patients. Intraclass correlations were calculated for variability in intensity and time parameters between qualitative and quantitative evaluation. Among all qualitative CEUS features, the pseudocapsule sign showed the highest Az (0.777; 95% confidence interval: 0.701-0.853) and yielded the highest sensitivity (67.4%) and specificity (88.0%); multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the pseudocapsule sign and color Doppler flow imaging patterns were the two strongest independent predictors for malignancy. For quantitative CEUS analysis, higher PI and shorter TTP were found in malignant renal masses than those in benign ones. The Intraclass correlation coefficient values among qualitative and the quantitative assessments were 0.00 for time and 0.03 for intensity. The pseudocapsule sign offered the most efficient performance among all the qualitative and quantitative CEUS features.

Differentiating solid, non-macroscopic fat containing, enhancing renal masses using fast Fourier transform analysis of multiphase CT

OBJECTIVE

To test the feasibility of two-dimensional fast Fourier transforms (FFT)-based imaging metrics in differentiating solid, non-macroscopic fat containing, enhancing renal masses using contrast-enhanced CT images. We quantify image-based intratumoral textural variations (indicator of tumor heterogeneity) using frequency-based (FFT) imaging metrics.

METHODS

In this Institutional Review Board approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act -compliant, retrospective case-control study, we evaluated 156 patients with predominantly solid, non-macroscopic fat containing, enhancing renal masses identified between June 2009 and June 2016. 110 cases (70%) were malignant RCC, including clear cell, papillary and chromophobe subtypes and, 46 cases (30%) were benign renal masses: oncocytoma and lipid-poor angiomyolipoma. Whole lesions were manually segmented using Synapse 3D (Fujifilm, CT) and co-registered from the multiphase CT acquisitions for each tumor. Pathological diagnosis of all tumors was obtained following surgical resection. Matlab function, FFT2 was used to perform the image to frequency transformation.

RESULTS

A Wilcoxon rank sum test showed that FFT-based metrics were significantly (p < 0.005) different between 1. benign vs malignant renal masses, 2. oncocytoma vs clear cell renal cell carcinoma and 3. oncocytoma vs lipid-poor angiomyolipoma. Receiver operator characteristics analysis revealed reasonable discrimination (area under the curve >0.7, p < 0.05) within these three groups of comparisons.

CONCLUSION

In combination with other metrics, FFT-metrics may improve patient management and potentially help differentiate other renal tumors. Advances in knowledge: We report for the first time that FFT-based metrics can differentiate between some solid, non-macroscopic fat containing, enhancing renal masses using their contrast-enhanced CT data.

Effect of iodinated contrast media on renal perfusion: A randomized comparison study in pigs using quantitative contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)

The administration of iodinated contrast media (CM) can cause microcirculatory disorder leading to acute renal dysfunction. In a prospective, randomized investigation two CM (Iodixanol vs Iopromide) were compared in 16 pigs. Each animal received 10 intra-aortal injections (5 ml Iodixanol or 4.32 ml Iopromide). Microcirculation was assessed using contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) directly on the kidney surface using time-to-peak (TTP) and blood-volume-analysis. Macroscopic observations were documented. Post mortem residual CM distribution in the kidneys was detected using X-ray. TTP was significantly prolonged over the descending vasa recta of the Iopromide group. This coincided with a visible marble-like pattern on the kidney surface occurring in 30 out of 80 Iopromide-injections but in 4 out of 80 Iodixanol-injections (p = 0.007). The blood volume over the entire kidney did not change after Iodixanol-application, but decreased by about 6.1% after Iopromide-application. The regional blood volume in the renal cortex showed a tendency to decrease by about 13.5% (p = 0.094) after Iodixanol-application, and clearly decreased by about 31.7% (p = 0.022) after Iopromide-application. The study revealed a consistent influence of repeated injections of two different CM on the kidney perfusion using three different imaging methods (CEUS analysis, macroscopic observation and X-ray analysis).