Characterization of histological subtypes of clear cell renal cell carcinoma using contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)

High-frame-rate contrast-enhanced ultrasound to differentiate between clear cell renal cell carcinoma and angiomyolipoma

BACKGROUND

To investigate the diagnostic efficacy of high-frame-rate contrast-enhanced ultrasound (H-CEUS) in differentiating between clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CCRCC) and angiomyolipoma (AML).

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed on the clinical data of 79 patients diagnosed with CCRCC and 31 patients diagnosed with AML at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University between October 2022 and December 2023. Conventional ultrasound (US) and H-CEUS examinations were conducted on all patients prior to surgery, dynamic images were recorded from the US, and the qualitative and quantitative parameters of H-CEUS were collected. The t-test, χ² test and non-parametric Mann-Whitney test were employed to assess differences in clinical data, US characteristics, and qualitative and quantitative parameters of H-CEUS between the CCRCC and AML groups. The independent risk factors of CCRCC were identified using binary logistic regression. The receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve was constructed to evaluate the diagnostic effectiveness of clinical + US and H-CEUS in differentiating between CCRCC and AML.

RESULTS

The CCRCC group and the AML group exhibited significant differences in patient gender, operation mode, nodular echo, and nodule blood flow (χ²=11.698, -, -,=10.582; P<0.001, <0.001, <0.001, and = 0.014, respectively). In addition, the H-CEUS qualitative analysis demonstrated significant differences between the AML group and the CCRCC group with respect to enhancement mode, regression mode, peak intensity, enhancement uniformity, no enhancement, and presence or absence of pseudocapsule (χ²=41.614, -, -, = 2.758, = 42.099, -; P<0.001, <0.001, <0.001, 0.097, <0.001, and <0.001, respectively). The Arrival time (AT) in the CCRCC group was significantly shorter than that in the AML group, as determined by quantitative analysis of H-CEUS (Z=-3.266, P = 0.001). Furthermore, the Peak intensity (PI), Ascent slope (AS), and The area under the curve (AUC) exhibited significantly higher values in the CCRCC group compared to the AML group (Z=-2.043,=-2.545,=-3.565; P = 0.041, = 0.011, and <0.001, respectively). Logistic regression analysis indicated that only gender, nodule echo, the pseudocapsule, AS, and AUC of H-CEUS were independent risk factors of CCRCC. The ROC curve revealed that combining gender and nodule echo yielded a sensitivity of 92.4%, specificity of 64.5%, and an AUC of 0.847 in distinguishing between CCRCC and AML. When combining the H-CEUS parameters of pseudocapsule, AS, and AUC, the sensitivity, specificity, and AUC for distinguishing between CCRCC and AML were 84.8%, 96.8%, and 0.918, respectively. No statistically significant difference was observed in the diagnostic effectiveness of the two methods (Z=-1.286, P = 0.198). However, H-CEUS demonstrated better AUC and specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

H-CEUS enhances the sensitivity and specificity of differentiating between CCRCC and AML by improving the temporal resolution, offering a more precise diagnostic foundation for identifying the most appropriate therapy for patients.

Characteristics of high frame frequency contrast-enhanced ultrasound in renal tumors

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to analyze the characteristics of high frame rate contrast-enhanced ultrasound (H-CEUS) in renal lesions and to improve the ability for differential diagnosis of renal tumors.

METHODS

A total of 140 patients with renal lesions underwent contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) examination in the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University from July 2022 to July 2023. Based on the tumor pathology and the results of enhanced CT, tumor patients were divided into malignant and benign groups. All subjects were examined using gray-scale ultrasound, conventional contrast-enhanced ultrasound (C-CEUS), and H-CEUS, and their dynamic images were recorded. Two radiologists independently analyzed and recorded the results of ultrasound, C-CEUS, and H-CEUS images and statistically analyzed the features of C-CEUS and H-CEUS images. The independent sample t-test was used to compare the difference in age and maximum diameter of nodules between the benign and malignant groups. The χ2 test was used to compare the sex, mode of operation, gray-scale ultrasound characteristics, and enhancement characteristics of the two CEUS modes (enhancement mode, regression mode, enhancement degree, enhancement uniformity, enhancement or not, enhancement direction, post-enhancement boundary and range, and pseudocapsule) between the benign and malignant groups. The difference in vascular morphology of malignant nodules of varying sizes under two angiographic modes.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in gender (χ2 = 10.408, P = 0.001), mode of operation (χ2 = 47.089, P < 0.001), nodule composition (χ2 = 7.481, P = 0.003), nodule echo (χ2 = 20.926, P < 0.001), necrosis (χ2 = 31.343, P < 0.001) and nodule blood flow (χ2 = 9.006, P = 0.029) between the benign and malignant groups. There were significant differences in the regression model (χ2 = 6.782, P = 0.034) and enhancement direction (χ2 = 13.771, P = 0.001) between the two radiographic techniques in the malignant group. There was a significant difference in the enhancement uniformity between the two CEUS techniques in the benign group (χ2 = 8.264, P = 0.004). There was a significant difference between the two CEUS techniques in displaying the vascular morphology in the malignant group with the maximum diameter of nodules ≤ 4.0 cm (χ2 = 11.421, P < 0.022). However, there was no significant difference between the two techniques in the malignant group with the maximum diameter of nodules > 4.0 cm.

CONCLUSION

Increasing the frame rate of ultrasound images is helpful to accurately display the enhanced features and vascular morphology of renal tumors, especially for malignant tumors with a maximum diameter of ≤ 4.0 cm. Thus, H-CEUS can make up for the limitation of CEUS with regard to the display of vascular morphology.

The quantitative evaluation of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the differentiation of small renal cell carcinoma subtypes and angiomyolipoma

Background

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has been widely used for renal lesion diagnosis and differential diagnosis. However, qualitative analysis of CEUS is subject to examinations with low reproducibility. This study aims to investigate the diagnostic value of CEUS quantitative parameters in differentiating small renal cell carcinoma (RCC) subtypes and angiomyolipoma (AML).

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on 97 cases of a small renal mass undergoing a CEUS before a radical or partial nephrectomy procedure. A region of interest (ROI) was placed in the tumor's maximum enhanced region (ROI_max) as much as possible, and adjacent renal cortex (ROI_refer) was selected from normal renal tissue around a mass of the same depth. The time-intensity curve (TIC) was used to analyze the ROI_max and the ROI_refer of the tumors quantitatively. Then the parameters of the ROI_max and the ROI_refer, including the differences between the parameters of the ROI_max and the ROI_refer, were analyzed statistically.

Results

In RCC and clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), the peak intensity (PI), slope (SL), area under the curve (AUC), area under the wash-in curve (AWI), area under the wash-out curve (AWO), time to peak intensity (TTP) and the mean transit time (MTT) were statistically significant between ROI_max and ROI_refer (all P=0.000). The △PI (△PI = PI_max - PI_refer), △SL (△SL = SL_max - SL_refer), △AUC (△AUC = AUC_max - AUC_refer), △AWI (△AWI = AWI_max - AWI_refer) and △AWO (△AWO = AWO_max - AWO_refer) of RCC were significantly higher than in AML (P=0.007, 0.000, 0.003, 0.048, 0.009, respectively), while the TTP (△TTP = TTP_max - TTP_refer) and △MTT (△MTT = MTT_max - MTT_refer) of RCC were significantly lower (both P=0.000). In comparison with papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC), the △PI, △SL, △AUC and △AWO of ccRCC were all larger (all P<0.05). The sensitivity, specificity, and AUC of the combination of parameter difference for differentiating RCC from AML were 100%, 81.2%, and 0.965, respectively, and for differentiating ccRCC from pRCC and chRCC, 85.71%, 85.92% and 0.911, respectively.

Conclusions

CEUS quantitative parameters have value in differentiating small RCC from AML and distinguishing ccRCC from pRCC and chRCC.

Comparison of computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the evaluation of unclear renal lesions

PURPOSE

 To compare the sensitivity and specificity of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the evaluation of unclear renal lesions to the histopathological outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 A total of 255 patients with a single unclear renal mass with initial imaging studies between 2005 and 2015 were included. Patient ages ranged from 18 to 86 with (mean age 62 years; SD ± 13). CEUS (255 patients), CT (88 out of 255 patients; 34.5 %) and MRI (36 out of 255 patients; 14.1 %) were used for determining malignancy or benignancy and initial findings were correlated with the histopathological outcome.

RESULTS

 CEUS showed a sensitivity of 99.1 % (95 % confidence interval (CI): 96.7 %, 99.9 %), a specificity of 80.5 % (95 % CI: 65.1 %, 91.2 %), a positive predictive value (PPV) of 96.4 % (95 % CI: 93.0 %, 98.4 %) and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 94.3 % (95 % CI: 80.8 %, 99.3 %). CT showed a sensitivity of 97.1 % (95 % CI: 89.9 %, 99.6 %), a specificity of 47.4 % (95 % CI: 24.4 %, 71.1 %), a PPV of 87.0 % (95 % CI: 77.4 %, 93.6 %) and a NPV of 81.8 % (95 % CI: 48.2 %, 97.7 %). MRI showed a sensitivity of 96.4 % (95 % CI: 81.7 %, 99.9 %), a specificity of 75.0 % (95 % CI: 34.9 %, 96.8 %), a PPV of 93.1 % (95 % CI: 77.2 %, 99.2 %) and a NPV of 85.7 % (95 % CI: 42.1 %, 99.6 %). Out of the 212 malignant lesions a total of 130 clear cell renal carcinomas, 59 papillary renal cell carcinomas, 7 chromophobe renal cell carcinomas, 4 combined clear cell and papillary renal cell carcinomas and 12 other malignant lesions, e. g. metastases, were diagnosed. Out of the 43 benign lesions a total 10 angiomyolipomas, 3 oncocytomas, 8 benign renal cysts and 22 other benign lesions, e. g. renal adenomas were diagnosed. Using CEUS, 10 lesions were falsely identified as malignant or benign, whereas 8 lesions were false positive and 2 lesions false negative.

CONCLUSION

 CEUS is an useful method which can be additionally used to clinically differentiate between malignant and benign renal lesions. CEUS shows a comparable sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV to CT and MRI. In daily clinical routine, patients with contraindications for other imaging modalities can particularly benefit using this method.

KEY POINTS

  · Wide availability. · Safe applicability in patients with known renal insufficiency or allergies to iodine or gadolinium. · Comparable sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV to CT and MRT. · May lead to a reduction in interventional radiological or surgical interventions.

CITATION FORMAT

· Marschner CA, Ruebenthaler J, Schwarze V et al. Comparison of computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the evaluation of unclear renal lesions. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2020; 192: 1053 - 1058.

Renal Masses: Evaluation with Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound, with a Special Focus on the Pseudocapsule Sign

The aim of this study was to analyze the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in differentiating between benign and malignant renal masses, with a special emphasis on the value of the pseudocapsule sign. A total of 163 consecutive patients with 163 renal masses were involved. The conventional ultrasonography and CEUS features were assessed. Sensitivity, specificity and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (Az) were calculated for qualitative CEUS, and a multivariate analysis was performed to analyze the correlation between the sonographic features and malignancy. Time to peak (TTP) and peak intensity (PI) were compared between benign and malignant renal masses for quantitative CEUS analysis in 72 of 163 patients. Intraclass correlations were calculated for variability in intensity and time parameters between qualitative and quantitative evaluation. Among all qualitative CEUS features, the pseudocapsule sign showed the highest Az (0.777; 95% confidence interval: 0.701-0.853) and yielded the highest sensitivity (67.4%) and specificity (88.0%); multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the pseudocapsule sign and color Doppler flow imaging patterns were the two strongest independent predictors for malignancy. For quantitative CEUS analysis, higher PI and shorter TTP were found in malignant renal masses than those in benign ones. The Intraclass correlation coefficient values among qualitative and the quantitative assessments were 0.00 for time and 0.03 for intensity. The pseudocapsule sign offered the most efficient performance among all the qualitative and quantitative CEUS features.

Multislice computed tomography/contrast-enhanced ultrasound image fusion as a tool for evaluating unclear renal cysts

Ultrasonography is a generally accepted imaging technique for diagnosing and monitoring cystic renal lesions. The widely used Bosniak classification (I-IV) categorizes renal cystic lesions into five distinctive groups according to ultrasonography and computed tomography (CT) image criteria. For solid renal lesions, determination of vascularity is discriminatory for malignancy in most instances. In indeterminate cases, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and magnetic resonance imaging/CT-ultrasound image fusion are able to detect and characterize difficult pathologies, with superior performance to either technique alone. In contrast to multislice CT (MS-CT), ultrasound image fusion is a real-time imaging technique that can be used in combination with other cross-sectional imaging modalities. This technical note describes state-of-the-art image fusion of CEUS and MS-CT to detect and characterize unclear renal pathologies.

Evaluation of renal lesions using contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS); a 10-year retrospective European single-centre analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the usefulness of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the evaluation of renal masses.

METHODS

This study included 255 patients with renal masses. Ages ranged from 18-86 years. CEUS was used for determining malignancy or benignancy and findings were correlated with the histopathological outcome. Out of 255 lesions, 212 lesions were malignant (83.1%) and 43 were benign (16.9%). Diagnostic accuracy was tested using the histopathological diagnosis as the gold standard.

RESULTS

CEUS showed a sensitivity of 99.1% [95% confidence interval (CI): 96.7%, 99.9%], a specificity of 80.5% (CI: 65.1%, 91.2%), a positive predictive value of 96.4% (CI: 93.0%, 98.4%) and a negative predictive value of 94.3% (CI: 80.8%, 99.3%). Kappa for diagnostic accuracy was κ = 0.85 (CI: 0.75, 0.94). Of 212 malignant lesions, 200 renal cell carcinomas and 12 other malignant lesions were diagnosed. Out of 43 benign lesions, 10 angiomyolipomas, 3 oncocytomas, 8 renal cysts and 22 other benign lesions were diagnosed.

CONCLUSION

CEUS is an useful method to differentiate between malignant and benignant renal lesions. To date, to our knowledge, this is the largest study in Europe for the evaluation of renal lesions using CEUS with a histopathological validation.

KEY POINTS

• CEUS helps clinicians detect and characterise unclear solid and cystic renal lesions • CEUS shows a high diagnostic accuracy in the characterization of these lesions • Proper surgical treatment or follow-up can be given with better diagnostic confidence.

Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the evaluation of unclear solid renal lesions

PURPOSE

To compare the sensitivity and specificity of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the evaluation of unclear renal lesions to the histopathological outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 36 patients with a single unclear solid renal lesion with initial imaging studies between 2005 and 2015 were included. CEUS and MRI were used for determining malignancy or benignancy and initial findings were correlated with the histopathological outcome. Out of the 36 renal masses a total of 28 lesions were malignant (77.8%) and 8 were found to be benign (22.2%). Diagnostic accuracy was testes by using the histopathological diagnosis as the gold standard.

RESULTS

CEUS showed a sensitivity of 96.4%, a specificity of 100.0%, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 100.0% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 88,9%. MRI showed a sensitivity of 96.4%, a specificity of 75.0%, a PPV of 93.1% and a NPV of 85.7%. Out of the 28 malignant lesions a total of 18 clear cell renal carcinomas, 6 papillary renal cell carcinomas and 4 other malignant lesions, e.g. metastases, were diagnosed. Out of the 8 benign lesions a total 3 angiomyolipomas, 2 oncocytomas, 1 benign renal cyst and 2 other benign lesions, e.g. renal adenomas were diagnosed. Using CEUS, 1 lesion was falsely identified as benign. Using MRI, 2 lesions were falsely identified as benign and 1 lesion was falsely identified as malignant.

CONCLUSION

CEUS is an useful method which can be additionally used to clinically differentiate between malignant and benign renal lesions. CEUS shows a comparable sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV to MRI. In daily clinical routine, patients with contraindications for other imaging modalities can particularly benefit using this method.