Renal tumor structured reporting including nephrometry score and beyond: what the urologist and interventional radiologist need to know

CT of the urinary tract revisited

Computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen is usually appropriate for the initial imaging of many urinary tract diseases, due to its wide availability, fast scanning and acquisition of thin slices and isotropic data, that allow the creation of multiplanar reformatted and three-dimensional reconstructed images of excellent anatomic details. Non-enhanced CT remains the standard imaging modality for assessing renal colic. The technique allows the detection of nearly all types of urinary calculi and the estimation of stone burden. CT is the primary diagnostic tool for the characterization of an indeterminate renal mass, including both cystic and solid tumors. It is also the modality of choice for staging a primary renal tumor. Urolithiasis and urinary tract malignancies represent the main urogenic causes of hematuria. CT urography (CTU) improves the visualization of both the upper and lower urinary tract and is recommended for the investigation of gross hematuria and microscopic hematuria, in patients with predisposing factors for urologic malignancies. CTU is highly accurate in the detection and staging of upper tract urothelial malignancies. CT represents the most commonly used technique for the detection and staging of bladder carcinoma and the diagnostic efficacy of CT staging improves with more advanced disease. Nevertheless, it has limited accuracy in differentiating non-muscle invasive bladder carcinoma from muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma. In this review, clinical indications and the optimal imaging technique for CT of the urinary tract is reviewed. The CT features of common urologic diseases, including ureterolithiasis, renal tumors and urothelial carcinomas are discussed.

Cross-sectional imaging assessment of renal masses with emphasis on MRI

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a useful complementary imaging tool for the diagnosis and characterization of renal masses, as it provides both morphologic and functional information. A core MRI protocol for renal imaging should include a T1-weighted sequence with in- and opposed-phase images (or, alternatively with DIXON technique), T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted images as well as a dynamic contrast-enhanced sequence with subtraction images, followed by a delayed post-contrast T1-weighted sequence. The main advantages of MRI over computed tomography include increased sensitivity for contrast enhancement, less sensitivity for detection of calcifications, absence of pseudoenhancement, and lack of radiation exposure. MRI may be applied for renal cystic lesion characterization, differentiation of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) from benign solid renal tumors, RCC histologic grading, staging, post-treatment follow-up, and active surveillance of patients with treated or untreated RCC.

The role of imaging in the management of renal masses

The wide availability of cross-sectional imaging is responsible for the increased detection of small, usually asymptomatic renal masses. More than 50 % of renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) represent incidental findings on noninvasive imaging. Multimodality imaging, including conventional US, contrast-enhanced US (CEUS), CT and multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) is pivotal in diagnosing and characterizing a renal mass, but also provides information regarding its prognosis, therapeutic management, and follow-up. In this review, imaging data for renal masses that urologists need for accurate treatment planning will be discussed. The role of US, CEUS, CT and mpMRI in the detection and characterization of renal masses, RCC staging and follow-up of surgically treated or untreated localized RCC will be presented. The role of percutaneous image-guided ablation in the management of RCC will be also reviewed.

State of the art in abdominal MRI structured reporting: a review

In the management of several abdominal disorders, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has the potential to significantly improve patient's outcome due to its diagnostic accuracy leading to more appropriate treatment choice. However, its clinical value heavily relies on the quality and quantity of diagnostic information that radiologists manage to convey through their reports. To solve issues such as ambiguity and lack of comprehensiveness that can occur with conventional narrative reports, the adoption of structured reporting has been proposed. Using a checklist and standardized lexicon, structured reports are designed to increase clarity while assuring that all key imaging findings related to a specific disorder are included. Unfortunately, structured reports have their limitations too, such as risk of undue report simplification and poor template plasticity. Their adoption is also far from widespread, and probably the ideal balance between radiologist autonomy and report consistency of has yet to be found. In this article, we aimed to provide an overview of structured reporting proposals for abdominal MRI and of works assessing its value in comparison to conventional free-text reporting. While for several abdominal disorders there are structured templates that have been endorsed by scientific societies and their adoption might be beneficial, stronger evidence confirming their imperativeness and added value in terms of clinical practice is needed, especially regarding the improvement of patient outcome.

New Preoperative Nomogram Using the Centrality Index to Predict High Nuclear Grade Clear Cell Renal Carcinoma

Objective

Nuclear grading is an independent prognosis factor of clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). A non-invasive preoperative predictive WHO/International Society of Urologic Pathology (WHO/ISUP) grading of ccRCC model is needed for clinical use. The anatomical complexity scoring system can span a variety of image modalities. The Centrality index (CI) is a quantitatively anatomical score commonly used for renal tumors. The purpose of this study was to develop a simple model to predict WHO/ISUP grading based on CI.

Materials and methods

The data in this study were from 248 ccRCC patients from five hospitals. We developed three predictive models using training data from 167 patients: a CI-only model, a valuable clinical parameter model and a fusion model of CI with valuable clinical parameters. We compared and evaluated the three models by discrimination, clinical usefulness and calibration, then tested them in a set of validation data from 81 patients.

Results

The fusion model consisting of CI and tumor size (valuable clinical parameter) had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.82. In the validation set, the AUC was 0.85. The decision curve showed that the model had a good net benefit between the threshold probabilities of 5–80%. And the calibration curve showed good calibration in the training set and validation set.

Conclusion

This study confirms that CI is associated with the WHO/ISUP grade of ccRCC, and the possibility that a bivariate model incorporating tumor size may help urologist’s evaluation patients’ prognostic.

Systematic Review of Contemporary Evidence for the Management of T1 Renal Cell Carcinoma: What IRs Need to Know for Kidney Cancer Tumor Boards

Renal cell carcinoma is a relatively common malignancy, with 60 to 70 thousand cases a year in the United States alone. Increased utilization of cross-sectional imaging has led to an increase in the number of early renal cell cancers seen by the medical establishment. In addition, certain patient populations have an increased risk of developing kidney cancers which may mandate aggressive screening protocols. This article discusses the epidemiology of renal cell cancers; discusses the current management guidelines from multiple specialty societies; discusses some of the surgical and interventional techniques used in the treatment of such lesions; and provides a review of the literature regarding treatments of early-stage renal cell cancers.