Cargando…

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

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of small renal masses in real practice. METHODS: Contrast-enhanced CT and MRI were performed between February 2008 and Feb...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kim, Jae Heon, Sun, Hwa Yeon, Hwang, Jiyoung, Hong, Seong Sook, Cho, Yong Jin, Doo, Seung Whan, Yang, Won Jae, Song, Yun Seob
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5059933/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27729042
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-016-1017-z
_version_ 1782459507320815616
author Kim, Jae Heon
Sun, Hwa Yeon
Hwang, Jiyoung
Hong, Seong Sook
Cho, Yong Jin
Doo, Seung Whan
Yang, Won Jae
Song, Yun Seob
author_facet Kim, Jae Heon
Sun, Hwa Yeon
Hwang, Jiyoung
Hong, Seong Sook
Cho, Yong Jin
Doo, Seung Whan
Yang, Won Jae
Song, Yun Seob
author_sort Kim, Jae Heon
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of small renal masses in real practice. METHODS: Contrast-enhanced CT and MRI were performed between February 2008 and February 2013 on 68 patients who had suspected small (≤4 cm) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) based on ultrasonographic measurements. CT and MRI radiographs were reviewed, and the findings of small renal masses were re-categorized into five dichotomized scales by the same two radiologists who had interpreted the original images. Receiver operating characteristics curve analysis was performed, and sensitivity and specificity were determined. RESULTS: Among the 68 patients, 60 (88.2 %) had RCC and eight had benign disease. The diagnostic accuracy rates of contrast-enhanced CT and MRI were 79.41 and 88.23 %, respectively. Diagnostic accuracy was greater when using contrast-enhanced MRI because too many masses (67.6 %) were characterized as “4 (probably solid cancer) or 5 (definitely solid cancer).” The sensitivity of contrast-enhanced CT and MRI for predicting RCC were 79.7 and 88.1 %, respectively. The specificities of contrast-enhanced CT and MRI for predicting RCC were 44.4 and 33.3 %, respectively. Fourteen diagnoses (20.5 %) were missed or inconsistent compared with the final pathological diagnoses. One appropriate nephroureterectomy and five unnecessary percutaneous biopsies were performed for RCC. Seven unnecessary partial nephrectomies were performed for benign disease. CONCLUSIONS: Although contrast-enhanced CT and MRI showed high sensitivity for detecting small renal masses, specificity remained low.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5059933
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50599332016-10-17 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 J Surg Oncol Research BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of small renal masses in real practice. METHODS: Contrast-enhanced CT and MRI were performed between February 2008 and February 2013 on 68 patients who had suspected small (≤4 cm) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) based on ultrasonographic measurements. CT and MRI radiographs were reviewed, and the findings of small renal masses were re-categorized into five dichotomized scales by the same two radiologists who had interpreted the original images. Receiver operating characteristics curve analysis was performed, and sensitivity and specificity were determined. RESULTS: Among the 68 patients, 60 (88.2 %) had RCC and eight had benign disease. The diagnostic accuracy rates of contrast-enhanced CT and MRI were 79.41 and 88.23 %, respectively. Diagnostic accuracy was greater when using contrast-enhanced MRI because too many masses (67.6 %) were characterized as “4 (probably solid cancer) or 5 (definitely solid cancer).” The sensitivity of contrast-enhanced CT and MRI for predicting RCC were 79.7 and 88.1 %, respectively. The specificities of contrast-enhanced CT and MRI for predicting RCC were 44.4 and 33.3 %, respectively. Fourteen diagnoses (20.5 %) were missed or inconsistent compared with the final pathological diagnoses. One appropriate nephroureterectomy and five unnecessary percutaneous biopsies were performed for RCC. Seven unnecessary partial nephrectomies were performed for benign disease. CONCLUSIONS: Although contrast-enhanced CT and MRI showed high sensitivity for detecting small renal masses, specificity remained low. BioMed Central 2016-10-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5059933/ /pubmed/27729042 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-016-1017-z Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Kim, Jae Heon
Sun, Hwa Yeon
Hwang, Jiyoung
Hong, Seong Sook
Cho, Yong Jin
Doo, Seung Whan
Yang, Won Jae
Song, Yun Seob
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
title 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
title_full 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
title_fullStr 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
title_full_unstemmed 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
title_short 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
title_sort 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
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5059933/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27729042
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-016-1017-z
work_keys_str_mv AT kimjaeheon diagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyandcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingofsmallrenalmassesinrealpracticesensitivityandspecificityaccordingtosubjectiveradiologicinterpretation
AT sunhwayeon diagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyandcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingofsmallrenalmassesinrealpracticesensitivityandspecificityaccordingtosubjectiveradiologicinterpretation
AT hwangjiyoung diagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyandcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingofsmallrenalmassesinrealpracticesensitivityandspecificityaccordingtosubjectiveradiologicinterpretation
AT hongseongsook diagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyandcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingofsmallrenalmassesinrealpracticesensitivityandspecificityaccordingtosubjectiveradiologicinterpretation
AT choyongjin diagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyandcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingofsmallrenalmassesinrealpracticesensitivityandspecificityaccordingtosubjectiveradiologicinterpretation
AT dooseungwhan diagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyandcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingofsmallrenalmassesinrealpracticesensitivityandspecificityaccordingtosubjectiveradiologicinterpretation
AT yangwonjae diagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyandcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingofsmallrenalmassesinrealpracticesensitivityandspecificityaccordingtosubjectiveradiologicinterpretation
AT songyunseob diagnosticaccuracyofcontrastenhancedcomputedtomographyandcontrastenhancedmagneticresonanceimagingofsmallrenalmassesinrealpracticesensitivityandspecificityaccordingtosubjectiveradiologicinterpretation