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

被引:10
|
作者
Zhao, Ping [1 ,2 ]
Zhu, Jianing [2 ,3 ]
Wang, Lanke [2 ]
Li, Nan [2 ]
Zhang, Xinghua [4 ]
Li, Jinfeng [4 ]
Luo, Yukun [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Li, Qiuyang [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Nankai Univ, Sch Med, Tianjin 300071, Peoples R China
[2] Chinese Peoples Liberat Army Gen Hosp, Med Ctr 1, Dept Ultrasound, Beijing 100853, Peoples R China
[3] Med Sch Chinese PLA, Beijing 100853, Peoples R China
[4] Chinese Peoples Liberat Army Gen Hosp, Med Ctr 1, Dept Radiol, Beijing 100853, Peoples R China
关键词
Renal cell carcinoma; Ultrasound imaging; Magnetic resonance imaging; Differential diagnosis; SUBTYPES; MASSES; PAPILLARY; ULTRASONOGRAPHY; CLASSIFICATION; MANAGEMENT; TUMORS; PART; MRI;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-023-09391-9
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
ObjectiveTo 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.MethodsA 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.ResultsThe 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).ConclusionsBoth 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.
引用
收藏
页码:3766 / 3774
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Differentiation of subtypes of renal cell carcinoma with contrast-enhanced ultrasonography
    Xue, Li-Yun
    Lu, Qing
    Huang, Bei-Jian
    Li, Cui-Xian
    Yan, Li-Xia
    Wang, Wen-Ping
    CLINICAL HEMORHEOLOGY AND MICROCIRCULATION, 2016, 63 (04) : 361 - 371
  • [22] Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced computed tomography and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of small renal masses in real practice: sensitivity and specificity according to subjective radiologic interpretation
    Kim, Jae Heon
    Sun, Hwa Yeon
    Hwang, Jiyoung
    Hong, Seong Sook
    Cho, Yong Jin
    Doo, Seung Whan
    Yang, Won Jae
    Song, Yun Seob
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2016, 14
  • [23] Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound with That of Contrast-enhanced Computed Tomography and Contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Evaluation of Renal Masses: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Furrer, Marc A.
    Spycher, Samuel C. J.
    Buettiker, Sophia M.
    Gross, Tobias
    Bosshard, Piet
    Thalmann, George N.
    Schneider, Marc P.
    Roth, Beat
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2020, 3 (04): : 464 - 473
  • [24] Evaluation of Uterine Fibroid Vascularity Using Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in Comparison with Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging
    Machado, Priscilla
    Tan, Allison
    Forsberg, Flemming
    Gonsalves, Carin F.
    ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2024, 50 (03): : 394 - 398
  • [25] Comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography and contrast-enhanced computed tomography in the diagnosis of cystic renal cell carcinoma
    Yuan, Xinchun
    Zhou, Aiyun
    Chen, Li
    Xu, Pan
    Zhang, Cheng
    Zhang, Yan
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE, 2017, 10 (07): : 10820 - 10826
  • [26] Differential diagnostic value of magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient for renal clear cell carcinoma and non-clear cell carcinoma
    Li, Xiaozhong
    Xiang, Xuyang
    Lin, Hui Ting
    ONCOLOGY LETTERS, 2023, 25 (02)
  • [27] Diagnostic Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Features for WHO/ISUP Grading in Renal Cell Carcinoma
    Huang, Xiao
    Nie, Fang
    Zhu, Ju
    Liu, Luping
    Wang, Nan
    JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE, 2023, 42 (07) : 1519 - 1525
  • [28] Diagnostic role of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in differentiating breast lesions
    Dakhil, Hussein Abed
    Easa, Ahmed Mohamedbaqer
    Hussein, Ammar Yaser
    Bustan, Raad Ajeel
    Najm, Hayder Suhail
    JOURNAL OF POPULATION THERAPEUTICS AND CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2022, 29 (02): : E88 - E94
  • [29] Diagnostic performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the differentiation of clear cell renal cell cancer
    Aydogan, Cemal
    Cansu, Aysegul
    Aydogan, Zeynep
    Erdemi, Sinan
    Teymur, Aykut
    Bektas, Onur
    Mungan, Sevdegul
    Kazaz, Ilke Onur
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2023, 48 (07) : 2349 - 2360
  • [30] Quantitative evaluation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for differentiation of renal cell carcinoma subtypes and angiomyolipoma
    Li, Cui-xian
    Lu, Qing
    Huang, Bei-jian
    Xue, Li-yun
    Yan, Li-xia
    Zheng, Feng-yang
    Wen, Jie-xian
    Wang, Wen-ping
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2016, 85 (04) : 795 - 802