Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

An overview of non-invasive imaging modalities for diagnosis of solid and cystic renal lesions

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Renal imaging is an essential investigative tool and preliminary task for determining a suitable sanative option for the treatment of kidney cancer. In recent decades, with the increasing usage of abdominal imaging, there is an upsurge in the number of adrenal incidentalomas. Among these accidentally revealed lesions, most of them are complex that warrant immediate aggressive treatment planning due to their malignant potential. The guidelines given by the American Urological Association (AUA), American College of Radiology (ACR), and European Association of Urology (EAU) vary concerning the use of ideal preliminary imaging modality to investigate the patients with suspected flank pain, hematuria, or palpable mass in the abdomen. Initially, an effort has been made to discriminate cystic and solid renal lesions which are helpful in separating benign and malignant nature as different imaging patterns are observed on distinct imaging modalities for solid and cystic renal lesions. Various attempts have been made to improve the accuracy of cancer diagnosis by employing different imaging modalities. The primary aim of this article is to study the capabilities of different imaging techniques for detecting and differentiating solid and cystic lesions to facilitate treatment planning based on computed tomography (CT), ultrasonography (US), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography (PET), and optical coherence tomography (OCT). Further, the advantages, disadvantages, new advancements, and future scope of each of the imaging modality have also been highlighted so that one can make a correct choice of imaging technique for diagnosis of a specific type of lesion. Additionally, some recommendations have also been mentioned by listing the requirements for the perfect imaging modality.

Graphical abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2019) Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin 69(1):7–34

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kidney cancer statistics (2016) Available from: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/kidney-cancer. Accessed 29 Dec 2016

  3. GLOBOCAN (2018) v1.0, Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: International Agency for Research on Cancer. http://globocan.iarc.fr. Accessed 24 Jan 2019

  4. Kaur R, Juneja M (2016) A survey of different imaging modalities for renal cancer. Indian J Sci Technol 9(44):1–6

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kaur R, Juneja M (2018) Comparison of different renal imaging modalities: an overview. In Progress in intelligent computing techniques: theory, practice, and applications, pp 47–57

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fujii Y, Komai Y, Saito K, Iimura Y, Yonese J, Kawakami S et al (2008) Incidence of benign pathologic lesions at partial nephrectomy for presumed RCC renal masses: Japanese dual-center experience with 176 consecutive patients. Urology. 72(3):598–602

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Milner MJ, Mcneil B, Alioto J, Proud K, Rubinas T, Picken M, Ilner J, Mcneil B, Alioto J et al (2006) Fat poor renal angiomyolipoma: patient, computerized tomography and histological findings. J Urol 176(3):905–909

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fujii Y, Ajima J, Oka K, Tosaka A, Takehara Y (1995) Benign renal tumors detected among healthy adults by abdominal ultrasonography. Eur Urol 27(2):124–127

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kutikov A, Fossett LK, Ramchandani P, Tomaszewski JE, Siegelman ES, Banner MP et al (2006) Incidence of benign pathologic findings at partial nephrectomy for solitary renal mass presumed to be renal cell carcinoma on preoperative imaging. Urology. 68(4):737–740

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Flum AS, Hamoui N, Said MA, Yang XJ, Casalino DD, McGuire BB et al (2016) Update on the diagnosis and management of renal angiomyolipoma. J Urol 195(4+):834–846

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Chronopoulos PN, Kaisidis GN, Vaiopoulos CK, Perits DM, Varvarousis MN, Malioris AV et al (2016) Spontaneous rupture of a giant renal angiomyolipoma-Wunderlich’s syndrome: report of a case. Int J Surg Case Rep 19:140–143

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lane BR, Aydin H, Danforth TL, Zhou M, Remer EM, Novick AC et al (2008) Clinical correlates of renal angiomyolipoma subtypes in 209 patients: classic, fat poor, tuberous sclerosis associated and epithelioid. J Urol 180(3):836–843

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bosniak MA (1986) The current radiological approach to renal cysts. Radiology. 158(1):1–10

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Israel GM, Bosniak MA (2005) An update of the Bosniak renal cyst classification system. Urology. 66(3):484–488

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Donin NM, Mohan S, Pham H, Chandarana H, Doshi A, Deng FM et al (2015) Clinicopathologic outcomes of cystic renal cell carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer 13(1):67–70

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bosniak MA (1993) Problems in the radiologic diagnosis of renal parenchymal tumors. Urol Clin North Am 20(2):217–230

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Graumann O, Osther SS, Karstoft J, Hørlyck A, Osther PJ (2015) Bosniak classification system: inter-observer and intra-observer agreement among experienced uroradiologists. Acta Radiol 56(3):374–383

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. El-Mokadem I, Budak M, Pillai S, Lang S, Doull R, Goodman C et al (2014) Progression, interobserver agreement, and malignancy rate in complex renal cysts (≥ Bosniak category IIF). Urol Oncol 32:24–e21

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hindman NM, Hecht EM, Bosniak MA (2014) Follow-up for Bosniak category 2F cystic renal lesions. Radiology. 272(3):757–766

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. O’malley RL, Godoy G, Hecht EM, Stifelman MD, Taneja SS (2009) Bosniak category IIF designation and surgery for complex renal cysts. J Urol 182(3):1091–1095

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Perez-Ordonez B, Hamed G, Campbell S, Erlandson RA, Russo P, Gaudin PB et al (1997) Renal oncocytoma: a clinicopathologic study of 70 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 21(8):871–883

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lopez-Beltran A, Scarpelli M, Montironi R, Kirkali Z (2006) 2004 WHO classification of the renal tumors of the adults. Eur Urol 49(5):798–805

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Oxley JD, Sullivan J, Mitchelmore A, Gillatt DA (2007) Metastatic renal oncocytoma. J Clin Pathol 60(6):720–722

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Hartman DS, Choyke PL, Hartman MS (2004) From the RSNA refresher courses: a practical approach to the cystic renal mass. Radiographics 24(suppl_1):S101–S115

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hes O, Michal M, Šíma R, Vaněček T, Brunelli M, Martignoni G et al (2008) Renal oncocytoma with and without intravascular extension into the branches of renal vein have the same morphological, immunohistochemical, and genetic features. Virchows Arch 452(2):285–293

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bhatt S, MacLennan G, Dogra V (2007) Renal pseudotumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188(5):1380–1387

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Chuang CK, Lai MK, Chang PL, Huang MH, Chu SH, Wu CJ et al (1992) Xanthogranulomatous pyelonephritis: experience in 36 cases. J Urol 147(2):333–336

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Osca JM, Peiro MJ, Rodrigo M, Martinez-Jabaloyas JM, Jimenez-Cruz JF (1997) Focal xanthogranulomatous pyelonephritis: partial nephrectomy as definitive treatment. Eur Urol 32(3):375–379

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Craig WD, Wagner BJ, Travis MD (2008) Pyelonephritis: radiologic-pathologic review. Radiographics. 28(1):255–276

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Gudbjartsson T, Hardarson S, Petursdottir V, Thoroddsen A, Magnusson J, Einarsson GV (2005) Renal oncocytoma: a clinicopathological analysis of 45 consecutive cases. BJU Int 96(9):1275–1279

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Warshauer DM, McCarthy SM, Street L, Bookbinder MJ, Glickman MG, Richter J et al (1988) Detection of renal masses: sensitivities and specificities of excretory urography/linear tomography, US, and CT. Radiology. 169(2):363–365

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kang SK, Chandarana H (2012) Contemporary imaging of the renal mass. Urol Clin North Am. 39(2):161–170

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kaur R, Juneja M, Mandal AK (2018) Computer-aided diagnosis of renal lesions in CT images: a comprehensive survey and future prospects. Comput Electr Eng 22

  34. Kaur R, Juneja M (2018) A survey of kidney segmentation techniques in CT images. Current Medical Imaging Reviews. 14(2):238–250

    Google Scholar 

  35. Haliloglu AH, Gulpinar O, Ozden E, Beduk Y (2011) Urinary ultrasonography in screening incidental renal cell carcinoma: is it obligatory? Int Urol Nephrol 43(3):687–690

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Heilbrun ME, Remer EM, Casalino DD, Beland MD, Bishoff JT, Blaufox MD et al (2014) ACR Appropriateness Criteria® - indeterminate renal mass. J Am Coll Radiol 12(4):333–341

    Google Scholar 

  37. Vikram R, Beland MD, Blaufox MD, Moreno CC, Gore JL, Harvin HJ et al (2016) ACR appropriateness criteria renal cell carcinoma staging. J Am Coll Radiol 13(5):518–525

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. O’Connor SD, Silverman SG, Ip IK, Maehara CK, Khorasani R (2013) Simple cyst–appearing renal masses at unenhanced CT: can they be presumed to be benign? Radiology. 269(3):793–800

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Lane BR, Campbell SC, Remer EM, Fergany AF, Williams SB, Novick AC et al (2008) Adult cystic nephroma and mixed epithelial and stromal tumor of the kidney: clinical, radiographic, and pathologic characteristics. Urology. 71(6):1142–1148

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Pooler BD, Pickhardt PJ, O’Connor SD, Bruce RJ, Patel SR, Nakada SY (2012) Renal cell carcinoma: attenuation values on unenhanced CT. Am J Roentgenol 198(5):1115–1120

    Google Scholar 

  41. Jonisch AI, Rubinowitz AN, Mutalik PG, Israel GM (2007) Can high-attenuation renal cysts be differentiated from renal cell carcinoma at unenhanced CT? Radiology. 243(2):445–450

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Silverman SG, Mortele KJ, Tuncali K, Jinzaki M, Cibas ES (2007) Hyperattenuating renal masses: etiologies, pathogenesis, and imaging evaluation. Radiographics. 27(4):1131–1143

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Curry NS, Chung CJ, Gordon B (1994) Unilateral renal cystic disease in an adult. Abdom Imaging 19(4):366–368

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Slywotzky CM, Bosniak MA (2001) Localized cystic disease of the kidney. Am J Roentgenol 176(4):843–849

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Cho KJ, Thornbury JR, Bernstein J, Heidelberger KP, Walter JF (1979) Localized cystic disease of the kidney: angiographic-pathologic correlation. Am J Roentgenol 132(6):891–895

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Katabathina VS, Kota G, Dasyam AK, Shanbhogue AK, Prasad SR (2010) Adult renal cystic disease: a genetic, biological, and developmental primer. Radiographics. 30(6):1509–1523

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Wood CG, Stromberg LJ, Harmath CB, Horowitz JM, Feng C, Hammond NA et al (2015) CT and MR imaging for evaluation of cystic renal lesions and diseases. Radiographics. 35(1):125–141

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Chow WH, Dong LM, Devesa SS (2010) Epidemiology and risk factors for kidney cancer. Nat Rev Urol 7(5):245

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Hartman DS, Davis CJ, Johns T, Goldman SM (1986) Cystic renal cell carcinoma. Urology. 28(2):145–153

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Schieda N, Vakili M, Dilauro M, Hodgdon T, Flood TA, Shabana WM (2015) Solid renal cell carcinoma measuring water attenuation (− 10 to 20 HU) on unenhanced CT. Am J Roentgenol 205(6):1215–1221

    Google Scholar 

  51. Eble JN, Sauter G, Epstein JI, Sesterhenn IA (2004) Pathology and genetics of tumors of the urinary system and male genital organs. In: World Health Organ. Classif. Tumors. IARC Press, Lyon

    Google Scholar 

  52. Hindman NM, Bosniak MA, Rosenkrantz AB, Lee-Felker S, Melamed J (2012) Multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma: comparison of imaging and pathologic findings. Am J Roentgenol 198(1):W20–W26

    Google Scholar 

  53. Eble JN, Bonsib SM (1998) Extensively cystic renal neoplasms: cystic nephroma, cystic partially differentiated nephroblastoma, multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma, and cystic hamartoma of renal pelvis. Semin Diagn Pathol 15(1):2–20

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Aubert S, Zini L, Delomez J, Biserte J, Lemaitre L, Leroy X (2005) Cystic renal cell carcinomas in adults. Is preoperative recognition of multilocular cystic renal cell carcinoma possible? J Urol 174(6):2115–2119

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Smith AD, Remer EM, Cox KL, Lieber ML, Allen BC, Shah SN et al (2012) Bosniak category IIF and III cystic renal lesions: outcomes and associations. Radiology. 262(1):152–160

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Couvidat C, Eiss D, Verkarre V, Merran S, Corréas JM, Méjean A et al (2014) Renal papillary carcinoma: CT and MRI features. Diagn Interv Imaging 95(11):1055–1063

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Egbert ND, Caoili EM, Cohan RH, Davenport MS, Francis IR, Kunju LP et al (2013) Differentiation of papillary renal cell carcinoma subtypes on CT and MRI. Am J Roentgenol 201(2):347–355

    Google Scholar 

  58. Amin MB, MacLennan GT, Gupta R, Grignon D, Paraf F, Vieillefond A et al (2009) Tubulocystic carcinoma of the kidney: clinicopathologic analysis of 31 cases of a distinctive rare subtype of renal cell carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 33(3):384–392

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Moch H, Cubilla AL, Humphrey PA, Reuter VE, Ulbright TM (2016) The 2016 WHO classification of tumors of the urinary system and male genital organs—part A: renal, penile, and testicular tumors. Eur Urol 70(1):93–105

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Moch H (2010) Cystic renal tumors: new entities and novel concepts. Adv Anat Pathol 17(3):209–214

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Cornelis F, Helenon O, Correas JM, Lemaitre L, Andre M, Meuwly JY et al (2016) Tubulocystic renal cell carcinoma: a new radiological entity. Eur Radiol 26(4):1108–1115

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Honda Y, Goto K, Nakamura Y, Terada H, Sentani K, Yasui W et al (2017) Imaging features of papillary renal cell carcinoma with cystic change-dominant appearance in the era of the 2016 WHO classification. Abdom Radiol 42(7):1850–1856

    Google Scholar 

  63. Jamis-Dow CA, Choyke PL, Jennings SB, Linehan WM, Thakore KN, Walther MM (1996) Small (< or = 3-cm) renal masses: detection with CT versus US and pathologic correlation. Radiology. 198(3):785–788

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Desser TS, Jeffrey RB (2001) Tissue harmonic imaging techniques: physical principles and clinical applications. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 22(1):1–10

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Schmidt T, Hohl C, Haage P, Blaum M, Honnef D, Weiβ C et al (2003) Diagnostic accuracy of phase-inversion tissue harmonic imaging versus fundamental B-mode sonography in the evaluation of focal lesions of the kidney. Am J Roentgenol 180(6):1639–1647

    Google Scholar 

  66. Siemer S, Uder M, Humke U, Lindenmeier T, Moll V, Rüdenauer E et al (2000) Value of ultrasound in early diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma. Urologe A 39(2):149–153

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Zagoria RJ (2000) Imaging of small renal masses: a medical success story. Am J Roentgenol 175(4):945–955

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Jinzaki M, Ohkuma K, Tanimoto A, Mukai M, Hiramatsu K, Murai M, Hata J (1998) Small solid renal lesions: usefulness of power Doppler US. Radiology. 209(2):543–550

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Setola SV, Catalano O, Sandomenico F, Siani A (2007) Contrastenhanced sonography of the kidney. Abdom Imaging 32(1):21–28

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Jakobsen J (1996) Echo-enhancing agents in the renal tract. Clin Radiol 51:40–43

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Tamai H, Takiguchi Y, Oka M, Shingaki N, Enomoto S, Shiraki T, Furuta M, Inoue I, Iguchi M, Yanaoka K, Arii K, Shimizu Y, Nakata H, Shinka T, Sanke T, Ichinose M (2005) Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the diagnosis of solid renal tumors. J Ultrasound Med 24(12):1635–1640

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Barr RG, Peterson C, Hindi A (2014) Evaluation of indeterminate renal masses with contrast-enhanced US: a diagnostic performance study. Radiology. 271(1):133–142

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Kazmierski B, Deurdulian C, Tchelepi H, Grant EG (2017) Applications of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the kidney. Abdom Radiol (NY)

  74. Chen L, Wang L, Diao X et al (2015) The diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in differentiating small renal carcinoma and angiomyolipoma. Biosci Trends 9:252–258

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Mueller-Peltzer K, Negrao de Figueiredo G, Graf T, Rübenthaler J, Clevert DA (2019) Papillary renal cell carcinoma in contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)–a diagnostic performance study. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 1(Preprint):1–6

    Google Scholar 

  76. Rübenthaler J, de Figueiredo GN, Mueller-Peltzer K, Clevert DA (2018) Evaluation of renal lesions using contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS); a 10-year retrospective European single-centre analysis. Eur Radiol 28(11):4542–4549

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Dai WB, Yu B, Diao XH, Cao H, Chen L, Chen Y, Zhan J (2019) Renal masses: evaluation with contrast-enhanced ultrasound, with a special focus on the pseudocapsule sign. Ultrasound Med Biol 45(8):1924–1932

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Mu J, Mao Y, Li F, Xin X, Zhang S (2019) Superb microvascular imaging is a rational choice for accurate Bosniak classification of renal cystic masses. Br J Radiol 92(xxxx):20181038

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Hindi A, Peterson C, Barr RG (2013) Artifacts in diagnostic ultrasound. Rep Med Imaging 6:29–48

    Google Scholar 

  80. Catalano C, Fraioli F, Laghi A, Napoli A, Pediconi F, Danti M et al (2003) High-resolution multidetector CT in the preoperative evaluation of patients with renal cell carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol 180(5):1271–1277

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Bosniak MA (1991) The small (less than or equal to 3.0 cm) renal parenchymal tumor: detection, diagnosis, and controversies. Radiology. 179(2):307–317

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Silverman SG, Lee BY, Seltzer SE, Bloom DA, Corless CL, Adams DF (1994) Small (< or = 3 cm) renal masses: correlation of spiral CT features and pathologic findings. Am J Roentgenol 163(3):597–605

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Mileto A, Nelson RC, Paulson EK, Marin D (2015) Dual-energy MDCT for imaging the renal mass. Am J Roentgenol 204(6):W640–W647

    Google Scholar 

  84. Prasad SR, Dalrymple NC, Surabhi VR (2008) Cross-sectional imaging evaluation of renal masses. Radiol Clin N Am 46(1):95–111

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Johnson PT, Horton KM, Fishman EK (2010) How not to miss or mischaracterize a renal cell carcinoma: protocols, pearls, and pitfalls. Am J Roentgenol 194(4):W307–W315

    Google Scholar 

  86. Israel GM, Bosniak MA (2005) How I do it: evaluating renal masses. Radiology. 236(2):441–450

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Israel GM, Bosniak MA (2008) Pitfalls in renal mass evaluation and how to avoid them. Radiographics. 28(5):1325–1338

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Yuh BI, Cohan RH, Francis IR, Korobkin M, Ellis JH (2000) Comparison of nephrographic with excretory phase helical computed tomography for detecting and characterizing renal masses. Can Assoc Radiol J 51(3):170

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Shirkhoda A (1991) Diagnostic pitfalls in abdominal CT. Radiographics. 11(6):969–1002

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Willatt JM, Hussain HK, Chong S, Kappil M, Azar SF, Liu PS et al (2014) MR imaging in the characterization of small renal masses. Abdom Imaging 39(4):761–769

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Bae KT, Heiken JP, Siegel CL, Bennett HF (2000) Renal cysts: is attenuation artifactually increased on contrast-enhanced CT images? Radiology. 216(3):792–796

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Schieda N, Avruch L, Flood TA (2014) Small (< 1 cm) incidental echogenic renal cortical nodules: chemical shift MRI outperforms CT for confirmatory diagnosis of angiomyolipoma (AML). Insights Imaging 5(3):295–299

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  93. Cohan RH, Sherman LS, Korobkin M, Bass JC, Francis IR (1995) Renal masses: assessment of corticomedullary-phase and nephrographic-phase CT scans. Radiology. 196(2):445–451

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Johnson PT, Horton KM, Fishman EK (2010) Optimizing detectability of renal pathology with MDCT: protocols, pearls, and pitfalls. Am J Roentgenol 194(4):1001–1012

    Google Scholar 

  95. Birnbaum BA, Jacobs JE, Langlotz CP, Ramchandani P (1999) Assessment of a bolus-tracking technique in helical renal CT to optimize nephrographic phase imaging. Radiology. 211(1):87–94

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Willemink MJ, Persson M, Pourmorteza A, Pelc NJ, Fleischmann D (2018 4) Photon-counting CT: technical principles and clinical prospects. Radiology. 289(2):293–312

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Goo HW, Goo JM (2017) Dual-energy CT: new horizon in medical imaging. Korean J Radiol 18(4):555–569

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  98. Marin D, Davis D, Choudhury KR, Patel B, Gupta RT, Mileto A, Nelson RC (2017) Characterization of small focal renal lesions: diagnostic accuracy with single-phase contrastenhanced dual-energy CT with material attenuation analysis compared with conventional attenuation measurements. Radiology. 284(3):737–747

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Deniffel D, Boutelier T, Labani A, Ohana M, Pfeiffer D, Roy C (2018) Computed tomography perfusion measurements in renal lesions obtained by bayesian estimation, advanced singular-value decomposition deconvolution, maximum slope, and Patlak models: intermodel agreement and diagnostic accuracy of tumor classification. Investig Radiol 53(8):477–485

    Google Scholar 

  100. Chen C, Kang Q, Xu B, Shi Z, Guo H, Wei Q, Lu Y, Wu X (2018) Fat poor angiomyolipoma differentiation from renal cell carcinoma at 320-slice dynamic volume CT perfusion. Abdom Radiol 43(5):1223–1230

    Google Scholar 

  101. Kim SH, Kim CS, Kim MJ et al (2016) Differentiation of clear cell renal cell carcinoma from other subtypes and fat-poor angiomyolipoma by use of quantitative enhancement measurement during three-phase MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 206:W21–W28

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Paño B, Macías N, Salvador R, Torres F, Buñesch L, Sebastià C, Nicolau C (2016) Usefulness of MDCT to differentiate between renal cell carcinoma and oncocytoma: development of a predictive model. Am J Roentgenol 206(4):764–774

    Google Scholar 

  103. Marin D, Davis D, Roy Choudhury K, Patel B, Gupta RT, Mileto A, Nelson RC (2017) Characterization of small focal renal lesions: diagnostic accuracy with single-phase contrast-enhanced dual-energy CT with material attenuation analysis compared with conventional attenuation measurements. Radiology. 284(3):737–747

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Schieda N, Lim RS, Krishna S, McInnes MD, Flood TA, Thornhill RE (2018) Diagnostic accuracy of unenhanced CT analysis to differentiate low-grade from high-grade chromophobe renal cell carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol 210(5):1079–1087

    Google Scholar 

  105. Salameh JP, McInnes MD, McGrath TA, Salameh G, Schieda N (2019) Diagnostic accuracy of dual-energy CT for evaluation of renal masses: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Roentgenol 212(4):W100–W105

    Google Scholar 

  106. Pourvaziri A, Parakh A, Mojtahed A, Ramesh AK, Sahani D (2019) Diagnostic performance of dual-energy CT and subtraction CT for renal lesion detection and characterization. Eur Radiol 27:1–2

    Google Scholar 

  107. Pedrosa I, Alsop DC, Rofsky NM (2009) Magnetic resonance imaging as a biomarker in renal cell carcinoma. Cancer. 115(S10):2334–2345

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Vendrami CL, Villavicencio CP, DeJulio TJ, Chatterjee A, Casalino DD, Horowitz JM, Oberlin DT, Yang GY, Nikolaidis P, Miller FH (2017) Differentiation of solid renal tumors with multiparametric MR imaging. Radiographics 37(7):2026–2042

    Google Scholar 

  109. Nazarian S, Hansford R, Rahsepar AA, Weltin V, McVeigh D, Ipek EG, Kwan A, Berger RD, Calkins H, Lardo AC, Kraut MA, Kamel IR, Zimmerman SL, Halperin HR (2017) Safety of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cardiac devices. N Engl J Med 377(26):2555–2564

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  110. Lassel EA, Rao R, Schwenke C, Schoenberg SO, Michaely HJ (2014) Diffusion-weighted imaging of focal renal lesions: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 24(1):241–249

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Hecht EM, Israel GM, Krinsky GA, Hahn WY, Kim DC, Belitskaya-Levy I et al (2004) Renal masses: quantitative analysis of enhancement with signal intensity measurements versus qualitative analysis of enhancement with image subtraction for diagnosing malignancy at MR imaging. Radiology. 232(2):373–378

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Holland AE, Goldfarb JW, Edelman RR (1998) Diaphragmatic and cardiac motion during suspended breathing: preliminary experience and implications for breath-hold MR imaging. Radiology. 209(2):483–489

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Feng Q, Fang W, Sun XP, Sun SH, Zhang RM, Ma ZJ (2017) Renal clear cell carcinoma: diffusion tensor imaging diagnostic accuracy and correlations with clinical and histopathological factors. Clin Radiol 72(7):560–564

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Van Baalen S, Froeling M, Asselman M, Klazen C, Jeltes C, Van Dijk L, Vroling B, Dik P, Ten Haken B (2018) Mono, bi-and tri-exponential diffusion MRI modelling for renal solid masses and comparison with histopathological findings. Cancer Imaging 18(1):44

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  115. van Oostenbrugge TJ, Fütterer JJ, Mulders PF (2018) Diagnostic imaging for solid renal tumors: a pictorial review. Kidney Cancer 1(Preprint):1–5

    Google Scholar 

  116. Kim BR, Song JS, Choi EJ, Hwang SB, Hwang HP (2018 Jun 1) Diffusion-weighted imaging of upper abdominal organs acquired with multiple b-value combinations: value of normalization using spleen as the reference organ. Korean J Radiol 19(3):389–396

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  117. Goyal A, Sharma R, Bhalla AS, Gamanagatti S, Seth A (2018) Comparison of MDCT, MRI and MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging in evaluation of focal renal lesions: the defender, challenger, and winner! Indian J Radiol Imaging 28(1):27

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  118. Nery F, Gordon I, Thomas DL (2018) Non-invasive renal perfusion imaging using arterial spin labeling MRI: challenges and opportunities. Diagnostics (Basel) 8(1)

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  119. De Leon AD, Kapur P, Pedrosa I (2019) Radiomics in kidney Cancer: MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin 27(1):1–3

    Google Scholar 

  120. Hötker AM, Mazaheri Y, Wibmer A, Karlo CA, Zheng J, Moskowitz CS, Tickoo SK, Russo P, Hricak H, Akin O (2017) Differentiation of clear cell renal cell carcinoma from other renal cortical tumors by use of a quantitative multiparametric MRI approach. Am J Roentgenol 208(3):W85–W91

    Google Scholar 

  121. Young JR, Coy H, Kim HJ, Douek M, Lo P, Pantuck AJ, Raman SS (2017) Performance of relative enhancement on multiphasic MRI for the differentiation of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) from papillary and chromophobe RCC subtypes and oncocytoma. Am J Roentgenol 208(4):812–819

    Google Scholar 

  122. Chiarello MA, Mali RD, Kang SK (2018) Diagnostic accuracy of MRI for detection of papillary renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Roentgenol 211(4):812–821

    Google Scholar 

  123. Akın IB, Altay C, Güler E, Çamlıdağ İ, Harman M, Danacı M, Tuna B, Yörükoğlu K, Seçil M (2019) Discrimination of oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma using MRI. Diagn Interv Radiol 25(1):5

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  124. Hain SF, Maisey MN (2003) Positron emission tomography for urological tumors. BJU Int 92(2):159–164

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Kang DE, White RL Jr, Zuger JH, Sasser HC, Teigland CM (2004) Clinical use of fluorodeoxyglucose F 18 positron emission tomography for detection of renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 171(5):1806–1809

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Schiepers C (2006) PET and PET/CT in kidney cancer. In: Imaging of Kidney Cancer. Springer, Berlin, pp 89–101

    Google Scholar 

  127. Bolton DM, Wong P, Lawrentschuk N (2007) Renal cell carcinoma: imaging and therapy. Curr Opin Urol 17(5):337–340

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Garg G, Juneja M (2018) A survey of prostate segmentation techniques in different imaging modalities. Curr Med Imaging Rev 14(1):19–46

    Google Scholar 

  129. Garg G, Juneja M (2018) A survey of denoising techniques for multi-parametric prostate MRI. Multimed Tools Appl:1–34

  130. Hu S, Zhang J, Cheng C, Liu Q, Sun G, Zuo C (2014) The role of 18 F-FDG PET/CT in differentiating malignant from benign portal vein thrombosis. Abdom Imaging 39(6):1221–1227

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  131. Campbell SPTA, Javadi MS, Karlsson M, Solnes LB, Axelsson R, Allaf ME, Gorin MA, Rowe SP (2017) 99mTc-Sestamibi SPECT/CT for the characterization of renal masses: a pictorial guide. Br J Radiol

  132. Jones KM, Solnes LB, Rowe SP, Gorin MA, Sheikhbahaei S, Fung G, Frey EC, Allaf ME, Du Y, Javadi MS (2017) Use of quantitative SPECT/CT reconstruction in 99mTc-sestamibi imaging of patients with renal masses. Ann Nucl Med

  133. Alongi P, Picchio M, Zattoni F, Spallino M, Gianolli L, Saladini G, Evangelista L (2016) Recurrent renal cell carcinoma: clinical and prognostic value of FDG PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43(3):464–473

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  134. Nakanishi Y, Kitajima K, Yamada Y, Hashimoto T, Suzuki T, Go S, Kanematsu A, Nojima M, Yamakado K, Yamamoto S (2018) Diagnostic performance of 11 C-choline PET/CT and FDG PET/CT for staging and restaging of renal cell cancer. Ann Nucl Med 32(10):658–668

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  135. Johnson DC, Vukina J, Smith AB, Meyer AM, Wheeler SB, Kuo TM et al (2015) Preoperatively misclassified, surgically removed benign renal masses: a systematic review of surgical series and United States population level burden estimate. J Urol 193(1):30–35

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  136. Jain M, Robinson B, Salamoon B, Thouvenin O, Boccara C, Mukherjee S (2015) Rapid evaluation of fresh ex vivo kidney tissue with full-field optical coherence tomography. J Pathol Inf 6:53

    Google Scholar 

  137. van Manen L, Dijkstra J, Boccara C, Benoit E, Vahrmeijer AL, Gora MJ, Mieog JS (2018) The clinical usefulness of optical coherence tomography during cancer interventions. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 144(10):1967–1990

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  138. Freund JE, Buijs M, Savci-Heijink CD, de Bruin DM, de la Rosette JJ, van Leeuwen TG, Laguna MP (2019) Optical coherence tomography in urologic oncology: a comprehensive review. SN Compr Clin Med 1(2):67–84

    Google Scholar 

  139. Lee HC, Zhou C, Cohen DW, Mondelblatt AE, Wang Y, Aguirre AD, Shen D, Sheikine Y, Fujimoto JG, Connolly JL (2012) Integrated optical coherence tomography and optical coherence microscopy imaging of ex vivo human renal tissues. J Urol 187(2):691–699

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  140. Buijs M, Wagstaff PG, de Bruin DM, Zondervan PJ, Savci-Heijink CD, van Delden OM, van Leeuwen TG, van Moorselaar RJ, de la Rosette JJ, Pes MP (2017) An in-vivo prospective study of the diagnostic yield and accuracy of optical biopsy compared with conventional renal mass biopsy for the diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma: the interim analysis. Eur Urol Focus 24

  141. Auer T, Heidegger I, De Zordo T, Junker D, Jaschke W, Steinkohl F, Aigner F (2019) Fusion imaging of contrast-enhanced ultrasound with CT or MRI for kidney lesions. In Vivo 33(1):203–208

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  142. Brinker DA, Amin MB, de Peralta-Venturina M, Reuter V, Chan DY, Epstein JI (2000) Extensively necrotic cystic renal cell carcinoma: a clinicopathologic study with comparison to other cystic and necrotic renal cancers. Am J Surg Pathol 24(7):988–995

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  143. Katabathina VS, Shiao J, Flaherty E, Prasad SR (2016) Cross-sectional imaging of renal masses: image interpretation–related potential pitfalls and possible solutions. In: Seminars in roentgenology, vol 51(1). Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 40–48

    Google Scholar 

  144. Kaur R, Juneja M, Mandal AK (2018) A hybrid edge-based technique for segmentation of renal lesions in CT images. Multimed Tools Appl:1–21

  145. Correas JM, Claudon M, Tranquart F, Hélénon O (2006) The kidney: imaging with microbubble contrast agents. Ultrasound Q 22(1):53–66

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UIET Panjab University, Chandigarh, India

    Ravinder Kaur & Mamta Juneja

  2. PGIMER, Chandigarh, India

    A. K. Mandal

Authors
  1. Ravinder Kaur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mamta Juneja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. K. Mandal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mamta Juneja.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kaur, R., Juneja, M. & Mandal, A.K. An overview of non-invasive imaging modalities for diagnosis of solid and cystic renal lesions. Med Biol Eng Comput 58, 1–24 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-019-02049-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-019-02049-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation