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
  • [31] A comparative study of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and contrast-enhanced CT for the detection and characterization of renal masses
    Fang, Liang
    Bai, Kun
    Chen, Yue
    Zhan, Jia
    Zhang, Yinjia
    Qiu, Zhiying
    Chen, Lin
    Wang, Ling
    BIOSCIENCE TRENDS, 2021, 15 (01) : 24 - 32
  • [32] The Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in Detecting Minute Renal Cell Carcinoma
    Li, Cui-xian
    Lu, Qing
    Huang, Bei-jian
    Xue, Li-yun
    Yan, Li-xia
    Wen, Jie-xian
    Wang, Wen-ping
    DISCOVERY MEDICINE, 2014, 18 (99) : 179 - 188
  • [33] Visualization rate of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and conventional ultrasound for pseudocapsule of renal cell carcinoma
    Yang, Bin
    Fu, Ninghuan
    Ge, Jingping
    Shen, Dejuan
    Meng, Qingxing
    Liu, Ping
    SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND ESSAYS, 2010, 5 (14): : 1852 - 1855
  • [34] Dynamic Contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Early Evaluation of Anti-angiogenic Therapy in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma
    Panebianco, Valeria
    Iacovelli, Roberto
    Barchetti, Flavio
    Altavilla, Amelia
    Forte, Valerio
    Sciarra, Alessandro
    Cortesi, Enrico
    Catalano, Carlo
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2013, 33 (12) : 5663 - 5666
  • [35] A direct comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection and prediction of aggressiveness
    Baur, Alexander D. J.
    Schwabe, Julia
    Rogasch, Julian
    Maxeiner, Andreas
    Penzkofer, Tobias
    Stephan, Carsten
    Rudl, Marc
    Hamm, Bernd
    Jung, Ernst-Michael
    Fischer, Thom
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2018, 28 (05) : 1949 - 1960
  • [36] Comparison of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasound for evaluation of the effects of sorafenib in a rat model of hepatocellular carcinoma
    Munoz, Nina M.
    Minhaj, Adeeb A.
    Maldonado, Kiersten L.
    Kingsley, Charles, V
    Cortes, Andrea C.
    Taghavi, Houra
    Polak, Urszula
    Mitchell, Jennifer M.
    Ensor, Joe E.
    Bankson, James A.
    Rashid, Asif
    Avritscher, Rony
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2019, 57 : 156 - 164
  • [37] Contrast-enhanced ultrasound findings of adult renal cell carcinoma associated with Xp11.2 translocation/TFE3 gene fusion: comparison with clear cell renal cell carcinoma and papillary renal cell carcinoma
    Wei, Shuping
    Tian, Fuli
    Xia, Qiuyuan
    Huang, Pengfei
    Zhang, Yidan
    Xia, Zhichao
    Wu, Min
    Yang, Bin
    CANCER IMAGING, 2019, 20 (01)
  • [38] Ultrasound Versus Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Subclinical Synovitis and Tenosynovitis: A Diagnostic Performance Study
    Bao, Zhongtao
    Zhao, Yanchun
    Chen, Shuqiang
    Chen, Xiaoyu
    Xu, Xiang
    Wei, Linglin
    Xiong, Meilian
    CLINICS, 2020, 75
  • [39] Comparative Diagnostic Evaluation with Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound, Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients with Pancreatic Cystic Neoplasms
    Sun, Ya
    Yang, Shuo
    Qi, Erpeng
    Liu, Fangyi
    Zhou, Fubo
    Lu, Yuhan
    Liang, Ping
    Ye, Huiyi
    Yu, Xiaoling
    CANCER MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH, 2020, 12 : 2889 - 2898
  • [40] Renal Cell Cancer Does Not Show a Typical Perfusion Pattern in Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound
    Haendl, T.
    Strobel, D.
    Legal, W.
    Frieser, M.
    Hahn, E. G.
    Bernatilk, T.
    ULTRASCHALL IN DER MEDIZIN, 2009, 30 (01): : 58 - 63