The Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in Diagnosing Small Renal Cell Carcinoma Subtypes and Angiomyolipoma.
angiomyolipoma
contrast-enhanced ultrasound
renal cell carcinoma
subtype
Journal
Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine
ISSN: 1550-9613
Titre abrégé: J Ultrasound Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8211547
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2022
Jun 2022
Historique:
revised:
10
08
2021
received:
04
04
2021
accepted:
12
08
2021
pubmed:
10
9
2021
medline:
18
5
2022
entrez:
9
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
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). 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. 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. 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.
Substances chimiques
Contrast Media
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1415-1423Subventions
Organisme : 2016 Science and Technology Project of the Shanghai Municipal Health and Family Planning Commission
ID : 201640285
Informations de copyright
© 2021 American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.
Références
Rossi SH, Klatte T, Usher-Smith J, Stewart GD. Epidemiology and screening for renal cancer. World J Urol 2018; 36:1341-1353.
Hakim SW, Schieda N, Hodgdon T, McInnes MD, Dilauro M, Flood TA. Angiomyolipoma (AML) without visible fat: ultrasound, CT and MR imaging features with pathological correlation. Eur Radiol 2016; 26:592-600.
Sun D, Wei C, Li Y, Lu Q, Zhang W, Hu B. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography with quantitative analysis allows differentiation of renal tumor histotypes. Sci Rep 2016; 6:35081.
Nguyen MM, Gill IS, Ellison LM. The evolving presentation of renal carcinoma in the United States: trends from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program. J Urol 2006; 176:2397-2400.
Atri M, Tabatabaeifar L, Jang HJ, Finelli A, Moshonov H, Jewett M. Accuracy of contrast-enhanced US for differentiating benign from malignant solid small renal masses. Radiology 2015; 276:900-908.
Wei SP, Xu CL, Zhang Q, et al. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for differentiating benign from malignant solid small renal masses: comparison with contrast-enhanced CT. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2017; 42:2135-2145.
Kasoji SK, Chang EH, Mullin LB, Chong WK, Rathmell WK, Dayton PA. A pilot clinical study in characterization of malignant renal cell carcinoma subtype with contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Ultrason Imaging 2017; 39:126-136.
Chen L, Wang L, Diao X, et al. The diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in differentiating small renal carcinoma and angiomyolipoma. Biosci Trends 2015; 9:252-258.
Ljungberg B, Bensalah K, Canfield S, et al. EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: 2014 update. Eur Urol 2015; 67:913-924.
Sidhu PS, Cantisani V, Dietrich CF, et al. The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations for the clinical practice of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in non-hepatic applications: update 2017 (short version). Ultraschall Med 2018; 39:154-180.
Xu ZF, Xu HX, Xie XY, Liu GJ, Zheng YL, Lu MD. Renal cell carcinoma and renal angiomyolipoma: differential diagnosis with real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med 2010; 29:709-717.
Jiang J, Chen Y, Zhou Y, Zhang H. Clear cell renal cell carcinoma: contrast-enhanced ultrasound features relation to tumor size. Eur J Radiol 2010; 73:162-167.
Xue LY, Lu Q, Huang BJ, Li CX, Yan LX, Wang WP. Differentiation of subtypes of renal cell carcinoma with contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 2016; 63:361-371.
Cao H, Fang L, Chen L, et al. The independent indicators for differentiating renal cell carcinoma from renal angiomyolipoma by contrast-enhanced ultrasound. BMC Med Imaging 2020; 20:32.
Markić D, Krpina K, Ahel J, et al. Different presentations of renal cell cancer on ultrasound and computerized tomography. Urologia 2014; 81:228-232.
Siracusano S, Bertolotto M, Ciciliato S, Valentino M, Liguori G, Visalli F. The current role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) imaging in the evaluation of renal pathology. World J Urol 2011; 29:633-638.
Oh TH, Lee YH, Seo IY. Diagnostic efficacy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for small renal masses. Korean J Urol 2014; 55:587-592.
Harvey CJ, Alsafi A, Kuzmich S, et al. Role of US contrast agents in the assessment of indeterminate solid and cystic lesions in native and transplant kidneys. Radiographics 2015; 35:1419-1430.
Cokkinos DD, Antypa EG, Skilakaki M, Kriketou D, Tavernaraki E, Piperopoulos PN. Contrast enhanced ultrasound of the kidneys: what is it capable of? Biomed Res Int 2013; 2013:595873.
van Oostenbrugge TJ, Runneboom W, Bekers E, Heidkamp J, et al. MRI as a tool to assess surgical margins and pseudocapsule features directly following partial nephrectomy for small renal masses. Eur Radiol 2019; 29:509-516.
Yamashita Y, Honda S, Nishiharu T, Urata J, Takahashi M. Detection of pseudocapsule of renal cell carcinoma with MR imaging and CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996; 166:1151-1155.
Ascenti G, Gaeta M, Magno C, et al. Contrast-enhanced second-harmonic sonography in the detection of pseudocapsule in renal cell carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 182:1525-1530.
Dai WB, Yu B, Diao XH, et al. Renal masses: evaluation with contrast-enhanced ultrasound, with a special focus on the Pseudocapsule sign. Ultrasound Med Biol 2019; 45:1924-1932.
Rübenthaler J, Reimann R, Hristova P, Staehler M, Reiser M, Clevert DA. Parametric imaging of clear cell and papillary renal cell carcinoma using contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 2016; 63:89-97.
Kazmierski B, Deurdulian C, Tchelepi H, Grant EG. Applications of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the kidney. Abdom Radiol 2018; 43:880-898.
Sung CK, Kim SH, Woo S, et al. Angiomyolipoma with minimal fat: differentiation of morphological and enhancement features from renal cell carcinoma at CT imaging. Acta Radiologica 2016; 57:1114-1122.
Li CX, Lu Q, Huang BJ, et al. Quantitative evaluation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for differentiation of renal cell carcinoma subtypes and angiomyolipoma. Eur J Radiol 2016; 85:795-802.
Xu ZF, Xu HX, Xie XY, et al. Renal cell carcinoma: real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasound findings. Abdom Imaging 2010; 35:750-756.
King KG, Gulati M, Malhi H, et al. Quantitative assessment of solid renal masses by contrast-enhanced ultrasound with time-intensity curves: how we do it. Abdom Imaging 2015; 40:2461-2471.