Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-2jptb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-16T19:26:06.272Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Radiological diagnosis of renal cancer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 August 2009

By
Richard H. Cohan  and
Saroja Adusumilli
Edited by
Uday Patel
Richard H. Cohan
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Saroja Adusumilli
Affiliation:
Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Uday Patel
Affiliation:
St George's Hospital, London
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Multi-detector CT (Computed tomography) and MRI (Magnetic resonance imaging) can detect and characterize most renal cancers, often differentiating them from non-surgical renal masses with a high degree of accuracy. In the paragraphs that follow, use of CT and MRI in detecting and appropriately characterizing renal cancers will be reviewed. There will be an emphasis on recent developments in the use of imaging to differentiate cancers from benign renal lesions. Suggested CT and MRI protocols also will be provided.

Recommended CT and MRI technique

Computed tomography performed in patients with suspected or known renal masses should include a series of thin section non-contrast images (obtained using an image thickness of no more than 3–5 mm and with images reconstructed at no more than 3–5 mm intervals). At least one series of contrast-enhanced images should be acquired (usually after intravenous injection of 100–150 ml of a 300–370 mg I/ml concentration of non-ionic contrast material, infused at a rate of 2–4 ml/s) during or after the nephrographic phase (at or after 100 seconds). Image thickness and reconstruction interval should be the same as that employed for the non-contrast images.

Magnetic resonance imaging examinations performed to evaluate patients with known or suspected renal masses should include T1-weighted sequences obtained before and after gadolinium administration. While some feel that T2-weighted sequences are not as helpful and may even be omitted, we believe that they should be obtained, as they can help identify small renal cysts (by their high signal intensity).

Type
Chapter
Information
Carcinoma of the Kidney , pp. 64 - 90
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beer, A. J., Dobritz, A. J., Zantl, N.et al., Comparison of 16-MDCT and MRI for characterization of kidney lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 186 (2006), 1639–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yuh, B. I. and Cohan, R. H., Different phases of renal enhancement: role on detecting and characterizing renal masses during helical CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 173 (1999), 747–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herts, B. R., Coll, D. M., Lieber, M. L.et al., Triphasic helical CT of the kidneys: contribution of vascular phase scanning in patients before urologic surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 173 (1999), 1273–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohan, R. H., Sherman, L. S., Korobkin, M.et al., Renal masses: assessment of corticomedullary-phase and nephrographic-phase CT scans. Radiology, 196 (1995), 445–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Birnbaum, B. A. and Jacobs, J. E., Multiphasic renal CT: comparison of renal mass enhancement during the corticomedullary and nephrographic phases. Radiology, 200 (1996), 753–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Szolar, D. H., Kammerhuber, F., Altziebler, S.et al., Multiphasic helical CT of the kidney: increased conspicuity for detection and characterization of small (< 3-cm) renal masses. Radiology, 202 (1997), 211–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herts, B. R., Einstein, D. M., and Paushter, D. M., Spiral CT of the abdomen: artifacts and potential pitfalls. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 161 (1993), 1185–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zeman, R. K., Zeiberg, Z., Hayes, W. S.et al., Helical CT of renal masses: the value of delayed scans. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 167 (1996), 771–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kopka, L., Fischer, U., Zoeller, G.et al., Dual-phase helical CT of the kidney: value of the corticomedullary and nephrographic phase for evaluation of renal lesions and preoperative staging of renal cell carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 169 (1997), 1573–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yuh, B. I., Cohan, R. H., Francis, I. R.et al., Comparison of nephrographic and excretory phase renal helical CT. Canad Assoc Radiol J, 51 (2000), 170–6.Google Scholar
Sussman, S. K., Illescas, F. F., Opalacz, J. P.et al., Renal streak artifact during contrast enhanced CT: comparison of high versus low osmolality contrast media. Abdom Imaging, 18 (1993), 180–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takebayashi, S., Hidai, H., Chiba, T.et al., Using helical CT to evaluate renal cell carcinoma in patients undergoing hemodialysis: value of early enhanced images. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 172 (1999), 429–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, K. A., Choi, J. W., Park, C. M.et al., Unusual renal cell carcinomas: a pictorial essay. Abdom Imag, 31 (2006), 154–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Israel, G. M. and Bosniak, M. A., How I do it: evaluating renal masses. Radiology, 236 (2005), 441–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hecht, E. M., Israel, G. M., Krinsky, G. A.et al., Renal masses: quantitative analysis of enhancement with signal intensity measurements versus qualitative analysis of enhancement with image subtraction for diagnosing malignancy at MR imaging. Radiology, 232 (2004), 373–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, J. H., Min, P. Q., Wang, P. J.et al., Dynamic CT evaluation of tumor vascularity in renal cell carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 186:5 (2006), 1423–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garant, M., Bonaldi, M., Taourel, P.et al., Enhancement patterns of renal masses during multiphase helical CT acquisitions. Abd Imag, 23 (1998), 431–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jinzaki, M., Tanimoto, A., Mukau, M.et al., Double-phase helical CT of small renal parenchymal neoplasms: correlation with pathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 26 (2000), 835–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macari, M. and Bosniak, M. A., Delayed CT to evaluated renal masses incidentally discovered at contrast-enhanced CT: demonstration of vascularity with deenhancement. Radiology, 213 (1999), 674–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Voci, S. L., Gottlieb, R. H., Fultz, P. J.et al., Delayed computed tomographic characterization of renal masses: preliminary experience. Abdom Imag, 25 (2000), 317–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maki, D. D., Birnbaum, B. A., Chakraborty, D. P.et al., Renal cyst pseudoenhancement: beam hardening effects on CT numbers. Radiology, 213 (1999), 468–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coulam, C. H., Sheafor, D. H., Leder, R. A.et al., Evaluation of pseudoenhancement of renal cysts during contrast-enhanced CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 174 (2000), 493–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Birnbaum, B. A., Maki, D. D., Chakraborty, D. P.et al., Renal cyst pseudoenhancement: evaluation with an anthropomorphic body CT phantom. Radiology, 225 (2002), 83–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bosniak, M. A.. The current radiological approach to renal cysts. Radiology, 158 (1986), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ronson, S., Frazier, H. A., Baluch, J. D.et al., Cystic renal masses: usefulness of the Bosniak classification. Urol Radiol, 13 (1991), 83–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, C. L., McFarland, E. G., Brink, J. A.et al., CT of cystic renal masses: analysis of diagnostic performance and interobserver variation. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 169 (1997), 813–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curry, N. S., Cochran, S. T. R., and Bissada, N. K., Cystic renal masses: accurate Bosniak classification requires adequate renal CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 175 (2000), 339–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benjaminov, O., Atri, M., O'Malley, M.et al., Enhancing component on CT to predict malignancy in cystic renal masses and interobserver agreement of different CT features. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 186 (2006), 665–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hartman, D. S., Ellsworth, W., Laskin, W. B.et al., Cystic renal cell carcinoma: CT findings mimicking a benign hyperdense cyst. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 159 (1992), 1235–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, T. E., Doelle, E. A., Cohan, R. H.et al., Cystic renal masses: a re-evaluation of the usefulness of the Bosniak systemAcad Radiol, 3 (1996), 564–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Israel, G. M., Hindman, N., and Bosniak, M. A., Evaluation of cystic renal masses: comparison of CT and MR imaging by using the Bosniak classification system. Radiology, 231 (2004), 365–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosniak, M. A., Megibow, A. J., Hulnick, D. H.et al., CT diagnosis of renal angiomyolipoma: the importance of detecting small amounts of fat. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 151 (1988), 497–501.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silverman, S. G., Pearson, G. D. N., and Seltzer, S. E., Small (< 3 cm) hyperechoic renal masses: comparison of helical and conventional CT for diagnosing angiomyolipoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 167 (1996), 877–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simpson, E. and Patel, U., Diagnosis of angiomyolipoma using computed tomography-region of interest < or = –10 HU or 4 adjacent pixels < or = –10 HU are recommended as the diagnostic thresholdsClin Radiol, 61 (2006), 410–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Israel, G. M., Hindman, N., Hecht, E.et al., The use of opposed-phase chemical shift MRI in the diagnosis of renal angiomyolipomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 194 (2005), 1868–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helenon, O., Chretien, Y., Paraf, F.et al., Renal cell carcinoma containing fat: demonstration with CT. Radiology, 188 (1993), 429–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strotzer, M., Lehner, K. B., and Becker, K., Detection of fat in a renal cell carcinoma mimicking angiomyolipoma. Radiology, 188 (1993), 427–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radin, D. R. and Chandrasoma, P., CT demonstration of fat density in renal cell carcinoma. Acta Radiologica, 33 (1992), 365–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Merran, S., Vieillefond, A., Peyromaure, M.et al., Case report: renal angiomyolipoma with calcification: CT-pathology correlation. Br J Radiol, 77 (2004), 782–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Akkad, T., Tsankov, A., Pelzer, A.et al., Case report: early diagnosis and straight forward surgery of an asymptomatic primary angiosarcoma of the kidney led to long-term survival. Int J Urol, 13 (2006), 1112–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, H. J., Kim, C. H., Choi, Y. J.et al., Juxtaglomerular cell tumor of kidney with CD34 and CD117 immunoreactivity: report of five cases. Arch Pathol Lab Med, 130 (2006), 707–11.Google Scholar
Mak, C. W., Chou, C. K., and Tzeng, W. S., Renal capsular leiomyoma: report of a case with unusual CT appearance. Acta Radiol, 47 (2006), 752–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Owari, Y., Konda, R., Omori, S.et al., Case report: myxoma of the kidney. Int J Urol, 13 (2006), 987–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rutherford, E. E., Manners, J. L., Smart, J. M.et al., Renal haemangioma: a diagnostic challenge. Clin Radiol, 61 (2006), 370–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tuncali, K., vanSonnenberg, E., Shankar, S.et al., Evaluation of patients referred for percutaneous ablation of renal tumors: importance of a preprocedural diagnosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 183 (2004), 575–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duchene, D. A., Lotan, Y., Cadeddu, J. A.et al., Histopathology of surgically managed renal tumors: analysis of a contemporary series. Urology, 62 (2003), 827–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frank, I., Blute, M. L., Cheville, J. C.et al., Solid renal tumors: an analysis of pathological features related to tumor size. J Urol, 170:6 (part 1) (2003), 2217–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hafron, J., Fogarty, J. D., Hoenig, D. M.et al., Imaging characteristics of minimal fat renal angiomyolipoma with histologic correlations. Urology, 66 (2005), 1155–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, J. K., Park, S. U., Shon, J. H.et al., Angiomyolipoma with minimal fat: differentiation from renal cell carcinoma at biphasic helical CT. Radiology, 230 (2004), 677–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jinzaki, M., Silverman, S. G., Tanimoto, A.et al., Angiomyolipomas that do not contain fat attenuation at unenhanced CT. Radiology, 234 (2005), 311–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, J. K., Kim, S. H., Jang, Y. J.et al., Renal angiomyolipoma with minimal fat: differentiation from other neoplasms at double-echo chemical shift FLASH MR imaging. Radiology, 239 (2006), 174–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohan, R. H., Dunnick, N. R., Degesys, G. E.et al., Computed tomography of renal oncocytoma. J Comput Asst Tomogr, 8 (1984), 284–7.Google ScholarPubMed
Gudbjartsson, T., Hardarson, H., Petursdottir, V.et al., Renal oncocytoma: a clinicopathological analysis of 45 consecutive cases. BJU Int, 96 (2005), 1275–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lopez-Beltran, A., Scarpelli, M., Montironi, R.et al., 2004 WHO classification of the renal tumors of the adults. Eur Urol, 49 (2006), 798–805.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohan, R. H., Dunnick, N. R., Leder, R. A.et al., Computed tomography of renal lymphoma. J Comput Asst Tomogr, 14 (1990), 933–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seth, S., Ali, S., and Fishman, E., Imaging of renal lymphoma: patterns of disease with pathologic correlation. Radiographics, 26 (2006), 1151–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choyke, P. L., Walther, M. M., Glenn, G. M.et al., Imaging features of hereditary papillary renal cancers. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 21 (1997), 737–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herts, B. R., Coll, D. M., Novick, A. C.et al., Enhancement characteristics of papillary renal neoplasms revealed on triphasic helical CT of the kidneys. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 178 (2002), 367–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mydlo, J. H., Weinstein, R., Misseri, R.et al., Radiologic, pathologic, and molecular attributes of two types of papillary renal adenocarcinomas. Scand J Urol Nephrol, 35 (2001), 262–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Roy, C., Sauer, B., Lindner, V.et al., MR imaging of papillary renal neoplasms: potential application for characterization of small renal masses. Eur Radiol, 17 (2007), 193–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Outwater, E. K., Bhatia, M., Siegelman, E. S.et al., Lipid in clear cell carcinoma: detection on opposed-phase gradient-echo MR images. Radiology, 205 (1997), 39–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yoon, S. K., Nam, K. J., Rha, S. H.et al., Collecting duct carcinoma of the kidney: CT and pathologic correlation. Eur J Radiol, 57:3 (2006), 453–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davidson, A. J., Choyke, P. L., Hartman, D. S.et al., Renal medullary carcinoma associated with sickle cell trait: radiologic findings. Radiology, 195 (1995), 83–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bosniak, M. A., Birnbaum, B. A., Krinsky, G. A.et al., Small renal parenchymal neoplasms: further obervations on growth. Radiology, 197 (1995), 589–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volpe, A., Panzarella, T., Rendon, R. A.et al., The natural history of incidentally detected renal masses. Cancer, 100 (2004), 738–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lamb, G. W. A., Bromwich, E. J., Vasey, P.et al., Management of renal masses in patients medically unsuitable for nephrectomy – natural history, complications, and outcome. Urology, 64 (2004), 909–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curry, N. S., Imaging the small solid renal mass. Abd Imag, 27 (2002), 629–636.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hain, S. F. and Maisey, M. N., Positron emission tomography for urological tumors. BJU Int, 92 (2003), 159–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cherng, S. C., Chang, C. Y., Fan, Y. M.et al., CT with anatomic delineation identifying renal cell carcinoma with normal metabolic activity on F-18 FDG PET imaging. Clin Nuc Med, 31 (2006), 490–1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ak, J. and Can, C., F-18 FDG PET in detecting renal cell carcinoma. Acta Radiol, 46 (2005), 895–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bosniak, M. A. and Rofsky, N. M., Problems in the detection and characterization of small renal masses. Radiology, 198 (1996), 638–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Birnbaum, B. A., Bosniak, M. A., Megibow, A. J.et al., Observations on the growth of renal neoplasms. Radiology, 176 (1990), 695–701.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Radiological diagnosis of renal cancer
    • By Richard H. Cohan, Professor, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI, USA, Saroja Adusumilli, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
  • Edited by Uday Patel, St George's Hospital, London
  • Book: Carcinoma of the Kidney
  • Online publication: 08 August 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511545436.006
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Radiological diagnosis of renal cancer
    • By Richard H. Cohan, Professor, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI, USA, Saroja Adusumilli, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
  • Edited by Uday Patel, St George's Hospital, London
  • Book: Carcinoma of the Kidney
  • Online publication: 08 August 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511545436.006
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Radiological diagnosis of renal cancer
    • By Richard H. Cohan, Professor, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI, USA, Saroja Adusumilli, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Hospital, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
  • Edited by Uday Patel, St George's Hospital, London
  • Book: Carcinoma of the Kidney
  • Online publication: 08 August 2009
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511545436.006
Available formats
×