Bosniak classification of cystic renal masses, version 2019: interpretation pitfalls and recommendations to avoid misclassification

Bosniak Classification of Cystic Renal Masses: Looking Back, Looking Forward

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

According to the 2019 update of the Bosniak classification, the main imaging features that need to be evaluated to achieve a correct characterization of renal cystic masses include the thickness of walls and septa, the number of septa, the appearance of walls and septa, the attenuation/intensity on non-contrast CT/MRI and the presence of unequivocally perceived or measurable enhancement of walls and septa. Despite the improvement deriving from a quantitative evaluation of imaging features, certain limitations seem to persist and some possible scenarios that can be encountered in clinical practice are still missing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A deep analysis of the 2019 update of the Bosniak classification was performed.

RESULTS

The most notable potential flaws concern: (1) the quantitative measurement of the walls and septa; (2) the fact that walls and septa > 2 mm are always referred to as "enhancing", not considering the alternative scenario; (3) the description of some class II masses partially overlaps with each other and with the definition of class I masses and (4) the morphological variations of cystic masses over time is not considered.

CONCLUSION

The present paper analyzes in detail the limitations of the 2019 Bosniak classification to improve this important tool and facilitate its use in daily radiological practice.

Scientific Status Quo of Small Renal Lesions: Diagnostic Assessment and Radiomics

Background: Small renal masses (SRMs) are defined as contrast-enhanced renal lesions less than or equal to 4 cm in maximal diameter, which can be compatible with stage T1a renal cell carcinomas (RCCs). Currently, 50-61% of all renal tumors are found incidentally. Methods: The characteristics of the lesion influence the choice of the type of management, which include several methods SRM of management, including nephrectomy, partial nephrectomy, ablation, observation, and also stereotactic body radiotherapy. Typical imaging methods available for differentiating benign from malignant renal lesions include ultrasound (US), contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Results: Although ultrasound is the first imaging technique used to detect small renal lesions, it has several limitations. CT is the main and most widely used imaging technique for SRM characterization. The main advantages of MRI compared to CT are the better contrast resolution and tissue characterization, the use of functional imaging sequences, the possibility of performing the examination in patients allergic to iodine-containing contrast medium, and the absence of exposure to ionizing radiation. For a correct evaluation during imaging follow-up, it is necessary to use a reliable method for the assessment of renal lesions, represented by the Bosniak classification system. This classification was initially developed based on contrast-enhanced CT imaging findings, and the 2019 revision proposed the inclusion of MRI features; however, the latest classification has not yet received widespread validation. Conclusions: The use of radiomics in the evaluation of renal masses is an emerging and increasingly central field with several applications such as characterizing renal masses, distinguishing RCC subtypes, monitoring response to targeted therapeutic agents, and prognosis in a metastatic context.

Renal Mass Imaging with MRI Clear Cell Likelihood Score: A User's Guide

Small solid renal masses (SRMs) are frequently detected at imaging. Nearly 20% are benign, making careful evaluation with MRI an important consideration before deciding on management. Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is the most common renal cell carcinoma subtype with potentially aggressive behavior. Thus, confident identification of ccRCC imaging features is a critical task for the radiologist. Imaging features distinguishing ccRCC from other benign and malignant renal masses are based on major features (T2 signal intensity, corticomedullary phase enhancement, and the presence of microscopic fat) and ancillary features (segmental enhancement inversion, arterial-to-delayed enhancement ratio, and diffusion restriction). The clear cell likelihood score (ccLS) system was recently devised to provide a standardized framework for categorizing SRMs, offering a Likert score of the likelihood of ccRCC ranging from 1 (very unlikely) to 5 (very likely). Alternative diagnoses based on imaging appearance are also suggested by the algorithm. Furthermore, the ccLS system aims to stratify which patients may or may not benefit from biopsy. The authors use case examples to guide the reader through the evaluation of major and ancillary MRI features of the ccLS algorithm for assigning a likelihood score to an SRM. The authors also discuss patient selection, imaging parameters, pitfalls, and areas for future development. The goal is for radiologists to be better equipped to guide management and improve shared decision making between the patient and treating physician. © RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material. See the invited commentary by Pedrosa in this issue.

Cone Beam Computed Tomography Image Fusion with Cross Sectional Images for Percutaneous Renal Tumor Ablation: Preliminary Data

PURPOSE

Percutaneous ablative treatments in the kidney are now standard options for local cancer therapy. Multimodality image guidance, combining two 3D image sets, may improve procedural images and interventional strategies. We aimed to assess the value of intra-procedural cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) with magnetic resonance (MR) or CT imaging fusion technique in the guidance of percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA) of renal neoplasms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifteen patients (eight males, seven females, median age 65 years, median lesion size 20 mm) underwent percutaneous MWA for 15 renal tumors. All the procedures were performed in a dedicated angiography room setting; CBCT ablation planning capabilities included multimodality image fusion. Preoperative contrast-enhanced CT was available in 12 patients, whereas magnetic resonance imaging in the remaining. All patients were considered inoperable due to comorbidities, advanced age, and/or refusal to undergo surgery. Exclusion criteria were: tumors visible at unenhanced CBCT, metastatic disease, and uncorrected coagulopathy. Technical success and technical effectiveness were calculated. Procedural time, complications and recurrences were registered.

RESULTS

MWA under CBCT-guidance with fusion technique was technically successful in 14 out of 15 cases (93%). The median procedural time was 45 min. No procedure-related complications were reported. No enhancing tissue was visualized in the area of ablation at 1-month follow-up. All 15 cases were recurrence-free at last follow-up assessment (median follow-up of 12 months); no cancer-specific deaths were registered.

CONCLUSION

CBCT-CT/MR image fusion is technically feasible and safe in achieving correct targeting and complete ablation of renal lesions. This approach bears the potential to overcome most of the limitations of unenhanced CBCT guidance alone; larger series are needed to validate this technique.

[Modern tomography imaging techniques in urological diseases]

BACKGROUND

Radiologic imaging is important for the detection, staging and follow-up of urological tumors. Basic therapy decisions for both oncological (surgical vs. systemic therapy, e.g. in testicular cancer) and non-oncological pathologies (interventional vs. conservative therapy, e.g. for ureteral stones) depend largely on the tomographic imaging performed. Due to its almost ubiquitous availability, speed and cost-effectiveness, computed tomography (CT) plays an important role not only in the clarification of abdominal trauma and non-traumatic emergencies, but also in staging and follow-up of oncological patients. However, the level of radiation exposure, impaired renal function and allergies to iodinated contrast media limit the use of CT. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be a good alternative for many areas of application in oncological and non-oncological imaging due to its high soft tissue differentiation and functional-specific protocols but without the use of ionizing radiation.

AIM

In the following, the main indications of abdominal and pelvic CT and MRI in urology and their limitations are summarized.

RESULTS

The areas of application between CT and MRI are increasingly overlapping, since the latest developments in CT continue to further reduce radiation exposure and increase contrast information, while the speed and robustness of MRI are significantly improving at the same time.

A Comprehensive Commentary on the Multilocular Cystic Renal Neoplasm of Low Malignant Potential: A Urologist’s Perspective

Multilocular cystic renal neoplasm of low malignant potential (MCRNLMP) is a cystic renal tumor with indolent clinical behavior. In most of cases, it is an incidental finding during the examination of other health issues. The true incidence rate is estimated to be between 1.5% and 4% of all RCCs. These lesions are classified according to the Bosniak classification as Bosniak category III. There is a wide spectrum of diagnostic tools that can be utilized in the identification of this tumor, such as computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MRI) or contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS). Management choices of these lesions range from conservative approaches, such as clinical follow-up, to surgery. Minimally invasive techniques (i.e., robotic surgery and laparoscopy) are preferred, with an emphasis on nephron sparing surgery, if clinically feasible.

How We Do It: Managing the Indeterminate Renal Mass with the MRI Clear Cell Likelihood Score

The widespread use of cross-sectional imaging has led to a continuous increase in the number of incidentally detected indeterminate renal masses. Frequently, these clinical scenarios involve an older patient with comorbidities and a small renal mass (≤4 cm). Despite aggressive treatment in early stages of the disease, a clear positive effect in reducing kidney cancer-specific mortality is lacking, indicating that many renal cancers exhibit an indolent oncologic behavior. Furthermore, in general, one in five small renal masses is histologically benign and may not benefit from aggressive treatment. Although active surveillance is increasingly recognized as a management option for some patients, the absence of reliable clinical and imaging predictive biologic markers of aggressiveness can contribute to patient anxiety and limit its use in clinical practice. A standardized approach to the image interpretation of solid renal masses has not been broadly implemented. The clear cell likelihood score (ccLS) derived from multiparametric MRI is useful in noninvasively identifying the clear cell subtype, the most common and aggressive form of kidney cancer. Herein, a review of the ccLS is presented, including a step-by-step guide for image interpretation and additional guidance for its implementation in clinical practice.

Interrater Agreement of Bosniak Classification Version 2019 and Version 2005 for Cystic Renal Masses at CT and MRI

Background The Bosniak classification system for cystic renal masses was updated in 2019 in part to improve agreement compared with the 2005 version. Purpose To compare and investigate interrater agreement of Bosniak version 2019 and Bosniak version 2005 at CT and MRI. Materials and Methods In this retrospective single-center study, a blinded eight-reader assessment was performed in which 195 renal masses prospectively considered Bosniak IIF-IV (95 at CT, 100 at MRI, from 2006 to 2019 with version 2005) were re-evaluated with Bosniak versions 2019 and 2005. Radiologists (four faculty members, four residents) who were blinded to the initial clinical reading and histopathologic findings assessed all feature components and reported the overall Bosniak class for each system independently. Agreement was assessed with Gwet agreement coefficients. Uni- and multivariable linear regression models were developed to identify predictors of dispersion in the final Bosniak class assignment that could inform system refinement. Results A total of 185 patients were included (mean age, 63 years ± 13 [standard deviation]; 118 men). Overall interrater agreement was similar between Bosniak version 2019 and version 2005 (Gwet agreement coefficient: 0.51 [95% CI: 0.45, 0.57] vs 0.46 [95% CI: 0.42, 0.51]). This was true for experts (0.54 vs 0.49) and novices (0.50 vs 0.47) and at CT (0.56 vs 0.51) and MRI (0.52 vs 0.43). Nine percent of masses prospectively considered cystic using Bosniak version 2005 criteria were considered solid using version 2019 criteria. In general, masses were more commonly classified in lower categories when radiologists used Bosniak version 2019 criteria compared with version 2005 criteria. The sole predictor of dispersion in Bosniak version 2019 class assignment was dispersion in septa or wall quality (ie, smooth vs irregular thickening vs nodule; 72% [MRI] and 60% [CT] overall model variance explained; multivariable P < .001). Conclusion Overall interrater agreement was similar between Bosniak version 2019 and version 2005; disagreements in septa or wall quality were common and strongly predictive of variation in Bosniak class assignment. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Eberhardt in this issue.