Details
Category: Volume 06 Issue 01 January 2018
Hits: 1397

Title: Role of ultrasound and CT scan in evaluation of Renal Masses

Authors: Dr Mukhtar Ahmad, Dr Dipesh Yadav

 DOI:  https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v6i1.123

Abstract

Background: The term renal “mass” includes a large variant of expansile entities which are aggregates of non functioning renal parenchyma. The non neoplastic renal masses can be grouped as renal cystic disease, inflammatory masses, vascular masses, angiomyolipomas and others. The neoplastic masses can be either benign which includes adenoma, hemangiomaetc or malignant like renal cell carcinoma, renal pelvic carcinoma and Wilm’s tumour.1

The ultrasonography (US) and computed tomography (CT) in diagnostic imaging, the accuracy in renal mass detection has approached close to 100%.CT is to be superior to intravenous urography, ultrasonography and angiography for detection of renal and retroperitoneal details and in staging of renal neoplasms.02 On the other hand, ultrasound combined with cyst aspiration has an important role to play in these cyst-like renal masses which are indeterminate on CT.03

Materials and Methods: The study had been carried out in the Department of Radiodiagnosis, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre in the period March 2012 to July 2013.

A total number of fifty (50) patients with suspected renal mass were studied, irrespective of age and sex. In all the patients taken up for the study, a detailed clinical history was taken with emphasis on duration of symptoms and specific complaints like fever, pain abdomen and hematuria. The patients were examined for any palpable lump abdomen. Routine and other relevant laboratory investigations were done e.g. Blood Urea, Serum Creatinine, Urine routine, microscopic examination, Culture and for malignant cells.

All patients with renal symptoms like hematuria, flank pain, clinically palpable renal lump or with renal mass in ultrasound, CT fulfilling the specified inclusion and exclusion criteria from March 2012 to May 2013 were enrolled into this study.

Inclusion Criteria: Patients with renal lesion on USG, CT and on other imaging modalities.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Pregnant females
  2. History of contrast hypersensitivity.
  3. Impaired renal functions.
  4. Bosniak category I cysts

Results: Out of 50 cases, eight were diagnosed radiologically & HPE was not required. 42 cases underwent HPE, out of these 37 cases were correctly diagnosed radiologically as malignant & remaining five cases were either misdiagnosed or radiologically diagnosed as indeterminate masses. Radiological correlation with HPE was done to see the nature of the lesion (Benign versus Malignant).In our study out of 50 cases, 10 cases were Benign & 40 were Malignant. Ten Benign cases include Oncocytoma (1), Abcess (1), APKD (3), Parapelvic cyst (1), Angiomyolipoma (1), Psuedo tumour (2) and Bosniak type (II) cyst (1). Eight (8) cases were correctly diagnosed radilogically as Benign and HPE was not carried out whereas two cases who were underwent HPE were proved to be Oncocytoma & abcess. Out of the 10 cases, one case was falsenegatively diagnosed as RCC which proved to be Oncocytoma on HPE. In our study specificity was found to be 90% (Table no. 20).%In our study 37 cases were diagnosed radiologically as malignant lesions out 40 malignant cases, sensitivity of imaging was formed to be 94.8.

Statistical Analysis: Statistical testing was conducted with the statistical package for the Social Science System Version SPSS 17.0. Nominal categorical data between the groups were compared using Chi-squared test or Fisher’s exact test as appropriate

Conclusion: Ultrasound remains the modality of choice for initial screening in cases of Adult Polycystic Kidney disease, Parapelvic cyst. CT is indicated only when an associated renal complication such as intra cyst haemorrhage, infection or tumour is suspected. Ultrasound has a definite role in determining the nature of renal cell carcinomas.

US is equally sensitive to CT in detecting venous invasion into renal vein or inferior venacava, in cases of renal cell carcinoma.

Keyword: Renal masses, Ultrasonography, CT scan.

References

  1. Jamis-Dow CA, Choyke PL, Jennings SB, Linehan WM, Thakore KN, Walther MM. Small (< or = 3-cm) renal masses: detection with CT versus US and patho-logic correlation. Radiology 1996;198(3): 785-8.
  2. Warshauer D.M., McCarthy S.M., Street L et al. Detection of Renal masses: sensitivities and specifici-ties of Excretory urography/Linear Tomography, US and CT. Radiology 1988;169:363-65
  3. Kutikov A, Fossett LK, Ramchandani P et al. Incidence of benign pathologic findings at partial nephrectomy for solitary renal mass presumed to be renal cell carcinoma on preoperative imaging. BJU Int 2008;68:737.
  4. Lane BR, Babineau D, Kattan MW et al. A preoperative prognostic nomogram for solid enhancing renal tumors 7 cm or less amenable to partial nephrectomy. J Urol 2007;178:42.
  5. Snyder ME, Bach A, Kattan MW, Raj GV, Reuter VE, and Russo P. Incidence of benign lesions for clinically localized renal masses smaller than 7 cm in radiological diameter: influence of sex. J Urol 2006;176: 2391.
  6. Pahernik S, Ziegler S, Roos F, Melchior SW, and Thuroff JW. Small renal tumors: correlation of clinical and pathological features with tumor size. J Urol 2007;178:414.
  1. Remzi M, Ozsoy M, Klingler HC et al. Are small renal tumors harmless? Analysis of histopathological features according to tumors 4 cm or less in diameter. J Urol 2006;176:896.
  2. Kristensen J.K., Hom H.H., Rasmussen S N et al. Ultrasonically guided percutaneous puncture of renal masses. Scand J Urol Nephrol (Suppl). 1972;15:49-56.
  3. Smith E. H., Bennett A.H. The usefulness of ultrasound in the evaluation of renal masses in adults. J. Urol 1975;113:525-29.
  4. Prasad CV, Saha MM, Goel GD. Comparative study of ultrasound & intravenous urogram in evaluation of renal lumps. Ind J RadiolImag 1987;41:261-64.
  5. Sagel, S.S., Stanley, R. J. Levith, R.G. Computed Tomography of Radiology 1977;124:359-70.
  6. Dunnick, N.R., Korobkin.: Computed tomography of the kidney. RCNA. 1984;22(2): 297-313.
  7. Bosniak M.A. Ambos M.A. Polycystic kidney disease. SeminRoentgenol 1975;10: 133-43.
  8. Madewell J.E., Hartman D.S., Lichtenstein J.E. Radiologic- Pathologic correlations in cystic disease of the kidney. RadiolClin North Am. 1979;17:261-79.
  9. Goldman S M, Hartman DS. Autosomal Dominant Polycystic kidney Disease. In: Pollack HM (ed) Clinical Urography. An Atlas and Textbook of Urological Imaging Vol 2, W.B. Saunders C. Philadelphia 1990;36:1092- 1112.
  10. Braasch WF and Schacht F.W. Pathological and clinical data concerning polycystic kidney. Surg. Gynecol. Obstet. 1933;57: 46.
  11. Love et al. Roentgenographic assessment of asymptomatic renal lesions. Radiology 1973;109:257-69.
  12. Leder & Dunnick. Transitional cell carcinoma of pelvicalices and ureter. AJR.1990;115(4):713-722
  13. Lipuma J.P. The kidney. In: Haaga J.R. and Alfidi R J (eds). Computed Tomography of the whole body. Vol 2. CV Mosby Co. 2nd 1988;101419.
  14. Levine E, Grantham J J. High-density renal cysts in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease demonstrated by CT. Radiology 1985;154:477-82
  15. Jordan WP Jr. Peripelvic cyst of the kidney. J. Urol 1962;87:97-101
  16. Amis E.S Jr. Cysts of the renal sinus. In: Pollack H.M. (ed). Clinical Urography. An Atlas Textbook of Urological. Imaging. Vol 2. W.B. Saunders Co. 1990;42:1185 – 1192
  17. Hidalgo H, Dunnick N R. Rosenberg ER et al. Parapelvic cysts: appearance on CT and sonography. Am J Roentgenol 1982; 138:667-71.
  18. Subramanayam B R, Megibow A J, Raghavendra BN, Bosniak M.A. Diffuse xanthogranulomatous pyelonephritis: analysis by computed tomography and sonography. UrolRadiol 1982;4:5-10.
  19. Skinner DG, Colvin RB, vermillion CD et al. Diagnosis and management of renal cell carcinoma. A clinical and pathologic study of 309 cases. Cancer 1971;28:1165.
  20. Charbonneau J W, Hattery R R, Ernst EC et al. Spectrum of sonographic findings in 125 renal masses other than benign simple cyst. Am J Roentgenol 1983;140:87-94
  21. Coleman B G, Arger P H, Mintz MC et al. Hyperdense renal masses: A computed tomographic dilemma. Am J Roentgenol 1984;143:291-94.
  22. Pollack H M, Arger P.H. Banner M P et al. Computerised Tomography of renal pelvic filling defects. Radiology 1981;138:645-51.
  23. Schechter DC, Vogel JM. The challenge of venous extension in malignant renal neoplasms. NY state J Med 1983;83:55.
  24. Bennington J. L., Beckwith J.B. Atlas of Tumour Pathology, 2nd series Fascicles 12. Tumours of the kidney, renal pelvis and ureter. Washington D.C., Armed Forces Institute of Pathology;1975 :93
  25. Levine E. Malignant Renal parenchymal tumours in adults. In: Pollack H.M. (ed): Clinical Urography. An Atlas and Textbook of Urological Imaging Vol. 2. W.B. Saunders Co. Philadelphia 1990 ;44:1216-1291
  26. Balfe D.M., McClennan B.L., Stanley R.J. et al. Evaluation of renal masses considered indeterminate on computed tomography. Radiology 1982;142:421-28
  27. Weyman P J, Mc Clennan B L, Lee J K T, Stanley R J. CT of calcified renal masses. Am J Roentgenol 1982;138:1095-99.
  28. Johnson C D, Dunnick N R, Cohan R H et al. Renal adenocarcinoma:CT staging of 100 tumours. Am J Roentgenol 1987; 148:59- 63.
  29. Belasco JB, Chatten J, D, Angio GJ. Wilm’s tumour. In Sutton W W,  Vietti TJ, Fernbach DJ (eds): Clinical paediatric oncology, 3rd    New York, Mosby 1984;25.
  30. Jaffe M.H., White S.J., Silver T.M. et al. Wilm’s’ tumour: Ultrasonic features, pathologic correlation and diagnostic pitfalls. Radiology 1981;140:147-52.
  31. Cronan J.J. Yoder C, Amis E S Jr. et al. The myth of anechoic renal sinus fat. Radiology 1982;144:149-152.
  32. Blacher EJ, Johnson De, Abdul – Karim FW et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of renal pelvis. Urology 1985;25:124-26.
  33. Wimbish K J, Sanders MM, Samuels B I, Francis I R. Squamous cell carcinoma of the renal pelvis: case report emphasizing sonographic and CT appearance. UrolRadiol 1983;5:267-69.
  34. Naurmi Y, Sato T, Horis et al. Squamous cell carcinoma of the uroepithelium. CT evaluation. Radiology 1989;173:853-56.
  35. Latham H S and Kay S. Malignant tumour of renal pelvis. Obstet.1974;138:613-622.
  36. Rabinowitz J, Wolf BS, Goldman R. The roentgen features of renal adenomas. Radiology 1965;84:263-69.
  37. Hajdu SI, Foote FW. Angiomyolipoma of the kidney. J Urol.1969;102:396–401.
  38. .Quinn MJ, Hartman DS, Friedman AC et al. Radiology 1984;153:49-3.5.
  39. Sulen MC, Fishman E K, Goldman S M et al. Bacterial renal infections: Role of CT. Radiology 1989;171:703-07.

Corresponding Author

Dr Mukhtar Ahmad

Radiologist, Department of Radiology,

Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Center

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.