Cargando…
Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the Evaluation of Renal Masses with Histopathological Validation—Results from a Prospective Single-Center Study
Background: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in characterizing between malignant and benign renal lesions confirmed by histological examination. Methods: Overall, 110 patients, for a total of 118 renal masses previously identified at CT and MRI underwent CEU...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9140371/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35626364 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12051209 |
_version_ | 1784715079333183488 |
---|---|
author | Tufano, Antonio Drudi, Francesco Maria Angelini, Flavia Polito, Eleonora Martino, Milvia Granata, Antonio Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista Kutrolli, Eriselda Sampalmieri, Matteo Canale, Vittorio Flammia, Rocco Simone Fresilli, Daniele Bertolotto, Michele Leonardo, Costantino Franco, Giorgio Cantisani, Vito |
author_facet | Tufano, Antonio Drudi, Francesco Maria Angelini, Flavia Polito, Eleonora Martino, Milvia Granata, Antonio Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista Kutrolli, Eriselda Sampalmieri, Matteo Canale, Vittorio Flammia, Rocco Simone Fresilli, Daniele Bertolotto, Michele Leonardo, Costantino Franco, Giorgio Cantisani, Vito |
author_sort | Tufano, Antonio |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in characterizing between malignant and benign renal lesions confirmed by histological examination. Methods: Overall, 110 patients, for a total of 118 renal masses previously identified at CT and MRI underwent CEUS. An expert radiologist evaluated morphological, qualitative and quantitative parameters. Acquired data were analyzed to assess the value of each parameter to differentiate between malignant and benign lesions. Results: Histological results of 118 renal masses showed 88 (75%) malignant lesions and 30 (25%) benign lesions. Among morphological features, inhomogeneous echogenicity was the best predictor of malignancy depicting a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 76%, 76%, 88% and 57%, respectively. Among qualitative parameters, the most reliable parameter was the presence of pseudo-capsule. Here, sensitivity, specificity, positive PPV and NPV were 85%, 86%, 94% and 71%, respectively. Among quantitative parameters, the most reliable parameters were peak intensity (PI) and the area under the (AUC) with sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV values of 94%, 92%, 96% and 87% and 99%, 92%, 97% and 97%, respectively. Finally, the most reliable parameters were combined to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. The best combination obtained was restricted to CEUS parameters (PI and AUC). Here, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy rate were 93%, 100%, 100%, 83% and 93%, respectively. Conclusions: CEUS increases the US accuracy to discriminate between benign and malignant renal lesions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9140371 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91403712022-05-28 Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the Evaluation of Renal Masses with Histopathological Validation—Results from a Prospective Single-Center Study Tufano, Antonio Drudi, Francesco Maria Angelini, Flavia Polito, Eleonora Martino, Milvia Granata, Antonio Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista Kutrolli, Eriselda Sampalmieri, Matteo Canale, Vittorio Flammia, Rocco Simone Fresilli, Daniele Bertolotto, Michele Leonardo, Costantino Franco, Giorgio Cantisani, Vito Diagnostics (Basel) Article Background: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in characterizing between malignant and benign renal lesions confirmed by histological examination. Methods: Overall, 110 patients, for a total of 118 renal masses previously identified at CT and MRI underwent CEUS. An expert radiologist evaluated morphological, qualitative and quantitative parameters. Acquired data were analyzed to assess the value of each parameter to differentiate between malignant and benign lesions. Results: Histological results of 118 renal masses showed 88 (75%) malignant lesions and 30 (25%) benign lesions. Among morphological features, inhomogeneous echogenicity was the best predictor of malignancy depicting a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 76%, 76%, 88% and 57%, respectively. Among qualitative parameters, the most reliable parameter was the presence of pseudo-capsule. Here, sensitivity, specificity, positive PPV and NPV were 85%, 86%, 94% and 71%, respectively. Among quantitative parameters, the most reliable parameters were peak intensity (PI) and the area under the (AUC) with sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV values of 94%, 92%, 96% and 87% and 99%, 92%, 97% and 97%, respectively. Finally, the most reliable parameters were combined to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. The best combination obtained was restricted to CEUS parameters (PI and AUC). Here, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy rate were 93%, 100%, 100%, 83% and 93%, respectively. Conclusions: CEUS increases the US accuracy to discriminate between benign and malignant renal lesions. MDPI 2022-05-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9140371/ /pubmed/35626364 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12051209 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Tufano, Antonio Drudi, Francesco Maria Angelini, Flavia Polito, Eleonora Martino, Milvia Granata, Antonio Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista Kutrolli, Eriselda Sampalmieri, Matteo Canale, Vittorio Flammia, Rocco Simone Fresilli, Daniele Bertolotto, Michele Leonardo, Costantino Franco, Giorgio Cantisani, Vito Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the Evaluation of Renal Masses with Histopathological Validation—Results from a Prospective Single-Center Study |
title | Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the Evaluation of Renal Masses with Histopathological Validation—Results from a Prospective Single-Center Study |
title_full | Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the Evaluation of Renal Masses with Histopathological Validation—Results from a Prospective Single-Center Study |
title_fullStr | Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the Evaluation of Renal Masses with Histopathological Validation—Results from a Prospective Single-Center Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the Evaluation of Renal Masses with Histopathological Validation—Results from a Prospective Single-Center Study |
title_short | Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in the Evaluation of Renal Masses with Histopathological Validation—Results from a Prospective Single-Center Study |
title_sort | contrast-enhanced ultrasound (ceus) in the evaluation of renal masses with histopathological validation—results from a prospective single-center study |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9140371/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35626364 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12051209 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tufanoantonio contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT drudifrancescomaria contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT angeliniflavia contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT politoeleonora contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT martinomilvia contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT granataantonio contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT dipierrogiovannibattista contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT kutrollieriselda contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT sampalmierimatteo contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT canalevittorio contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT flammiaroccosimone contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT fresillidaniele contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT bertolottomichele contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT leonardocostantino contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT francogiorgio contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy AT cantisanivito contrastenhancedultrasoundceusintheevaluationofrenalmasseswithhistopathologicalvalidationresultsfromaprospectivesinglecenterstudy |