Renal oncocytoma: Is URO‐CT useful in histological diagnosis?

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Almeida Dores, João
Data de Publicação: 2017
Outros Autores: Kronenberg, Peter, Bargão Santos, Pedro, Ferreira, Sérgio, Carrasquinho Gomes, Francisco
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.24915/aup.33.3.35
Resumo: IntroductionOver the past few years, the increasing use of cross‐sectional imaging, including ultrasound and computed tomography imaging, resulted in an increase incidental diagnosis of renal tumors, especially small renal masses (<4cm). The knowledge that 30% of these masses may be benign, including oncocytomas led to the investigation for more effective methods of diagnosis in order to avoid overtreatment situations.ObjectivesThe authors decided to analyse and compare contrast enhancement patterns of oncocytomas and clear‐cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) to predict histology.Material and methodsBetween 2004‐2015 we retrospectively identified 32 patients with either histological confirmation of renal oncocytoma (N=16) or ccRCC (N=16) who underwent percutaneous biopsy, total or partial nephrectomy. The relative attenuation of solid renal lesions and normal renal cortex was determined in the unenhanced and nephrographic phase. Statistical comparison was carried out by Mann‐Withney test.ResultsThe oncocytomas and cc‐RCC average size was 3.7cm [1.8 to 14] and 3.5cm [1.9 to 8.4], respectively. The average attenuation in the unenhanced phase was 33HU and 32HU, respectively. In nephrographic phase, the average contrast enhancement was 47.5 and 47.4H, respectively. In nephrographic phase, the attenuation difference between the oncocytomas and normal renal cortex was 43.5HU and the attenuation difference between the cc‐RCC and normal renal cortex was 59.7HU. These results were statistically significant (p<0.05).ConclusionsIn the nephrographic phase, URO‐CT reveals that oncocytomas have greater isodensity to the normal renal cortex compared to cc‐RCC. This finding can help us to determine which lesions we should biopsy or not.
id RCAP_213a04c78091436e4bc7046942b435ed
oai_identifier_str oai:oai.actaurologicaportuguesa.com:article/35
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Renal oncocytoma: Is URO‐CT useful in histological diagnosis?Oncocitoma renal: tem a URO‐TC utilidade no diagnóstico histológico?Renal oncocytomaRenal cell carcinomaDiagnosisURO‐CTOncocitoma renalCarcinoma de células renaisDiagnósticoURO‐TCIntroductionOver the past few years, the increasing use of cross‐sectional imaging, including ultrasound and computed tomography imaging, resulted in an increase incidental diagnosis of renal tumors, especially small renal masses (<4cm). The knowledge that 30% of these masses may be benign, including oncocytomas led to the investigation for more effective methods of diagnosis in order to avoid overtreatment situations.ObjectivesThe authors decided to analyse and compare contrast enhancement patterns of oncocytomas and clear‐cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) to predict histology.Material and methodsBetween 2004‐2015 we retrospectively identified 32 patients with either histological confirmation of renal oncocytoma (N=16) or ccRCC (N=16) who underwent percutaneous biopsy, total or partial nephrectomy. The relative attenuation of solid renal lesions and normal renal cortex was determined in the unenhanced and nephrographic phase. Statistical comparison was carried out by Mann‐Withney test.ResultsThe oncocytomas and cc‐RCC average size was 3.7cm [1.8 to 14] and 3.5cm [1.9 to 8.4], respectively. The average attenuation in the unenhanced phase was 33HU and 32HU, respectively. In nephrographic phase, the average contrast enhancement was 47.5 and 47.4H, respectively. In nephrographic phase, the attenuation difference between the oncocytomas and normal renal cortex was 43.5HU and the attenuation difference between the cc‐RCC and normal renal cortex was 59.7HU. These results were statistically significant (p<0.05).ConclusionsIn the nephrographic phase, URO‐CT reveals that oncocytomas have greater isodensity to the normal renal cortex compared to cc‐RCC. This finding can help us to determine which lesions we should biopsy or not.IntroduçãoAo longo dos últimos anos, a crescente utilização de exames imagiológicos, nomeadamente ecografia e tomografia computorizada (TC), traduziu‐se num aumento do diagnóstico incidental de tumores renais, sobretudo pequenas massas renais (<4cm). O conhecimento de que até 30% destas massas podem ser benignas, entre elas os oncocitomas, levou à procura de métodos de diagnóstico mais eficazes, de forma a evitar situações de sobretratamento e de forma a tomaram‐se decisões terapêuticas mais fundamentadas.ObjetivosAnalisar retrospetivamente uma série de tumores renais histologicamente comprovados, nomeadamente oncocitomas e carcinoma de células renais (CCR), e verificar se existem diferenças morfológicas e/ou nos padrões de captação de contraste através da URO‐TC.Material e métodosIdentificámos todos os tumores renais entre 2004‐2015 com o diagnóstico histológico de oncocitoma e de CCR. Estes resultados foram obtidos por biopsia do tumor renal, tumorectomia/nefrectomia parcial ou nefrectomia radical. Registámos e comparámos as características morfológicas e os padrões de captação de contraste na fase nefrográfica com medição de unidades de Hounsfield (HU) dos oncocitomas e dos CCR (células claras), selecionados de acordo com a dimensão (aprox. idêntica à dos oncocitomas) e obtidos na sequência de tumorectomia renal ou nefrectomia radical.ResultadosIdentificaram‐se 16 CCR e 31 oncocitomas, dos quais 15 foram excluídos por não termos acesso às imagens de TC no sistema informático. A dimensão média dos oncocitomas foi 3,7cm (1,8‐14) e a dos CCR 3,5cm (1,9‐8,4). A atenuação de contraste média dos oncocitomas e dos CCR na fase sem contraste foi de 33 HU e 32 HU, respetivamente. Na fase nefrográfica, a captação média de contraste para os oncocitomas foi de 47,5HU e 47,4HU para os CCR. Na fase nefrográfica, a diferença de atenuação entre os oncocitomas e o parênquima renal normal foi 43,5 HU e a diferença de atenuação entre os CCR e o parênquima renal normal foi 59,7 HU. Estes resultados foram estatisticamente significativos (p<0,05). Não se identificaram outras alterações na fase excretora da TC, nem diferenças relevantes de carácter morfológico, nomeadamente nos contornos das lesões, presença de calcificações, ou de cicatriz central.ConclusõesNa avaliação imagiológica por URO‐TC, nomeadamente na fase nefrográfica, parece existir uma tendência para maior isodensidade dos oncocitomas em relação ao parênquima renal normal. Este achado poderá contribuir para uma melhor decisão terapêutica, na medida em que nos pode direcionar para uma biopsia de confirmação em detrimento da excisão cirúrgica.Associação Portuguesa de Urologia2017-04-11T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.24915/aup.33.3.35oai:oai.actaurologicaportuguesa.com:article/35Acta Urológica Portuguesa; Vol. 33 No. 3 (2016): Setembro-Dezembro; 98-103Acta Urológica Portuguesa; v. 33 n. 3 (2016): Setembro-Dezembro; 98-1032387-04192341-4022reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPporhttp://www.actaurologicaportuguesa.com/index.php/aup/article/view/35https://doi.org/10.24915/aup.33.3.35http://www.actaurologicaportuguesa.com/index.php/aup/article/view/35/5Almeida Dores, JoãoKronenberg, PeterBargão Santos, PedroFerreira, SérgioCarrasquinho Gomes, Franciscoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-09-21T09:04:45Zoai:oai.actaurologicaportuguesa.com:article/35Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T15:55:52.564469Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Renal oncocytoma: Is URO‐CT useful in histological diagnosis?
Oncocitoma renal: tem a URO‐TC utilidade no diagnóstico histológico?
title Renal oncocytoma: Is URO‐CT useful in histological diagnosis?
spellingShingle Renal oncocytoma: Is URO‐CT useful in histological diagnosis?
Almeida Dores, João
Renal oncocytoma
Renal cell carcinoma
Diagnosis
URO‐CT
Oncocitoma renal
Carcinoma de células renais
Diagnóstico
URO‐TC
title_short Renal oncocytoma: Is URO‐CT useful in histological diagnosis?
title_full Renal oncocytoma: Is URO‐CT useful in histological diagnosis?
title_fullStr Renal oncocytoma: Is URO‐CT useful in histological diagnosis?
title_full_unstemmed Renal oncocytoma: Is URO‐CT useful in histological diagnosis?
title_sort Renal oncocytoma: Is URO‐CT useful in histological diagnosis?
author Almeida Dores, João
author_facet Almeida Dores, João
Kronenberg, Peter
Bargão Santos, Pedro
Ferreira, Sérgio
Carrasquinho Gomes, Francisco
author_role author
author2 Kronenberg, Peter
Bargão Santos, Pedro
Ferreira, Sérgio
Carrasquinho Gomes, Francisco
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Almeida Dores, João
Kronenberg, Peter
Bargão Santos, Pedro
Ferreira, Sérgio
Carrasquinho Gomes, Francisco
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Renal oncocytoma
Renal cell carcinoma
Diagnosis
URO‐CT
Oncocitoma renal
Carcinoma de células renais
Diagnóstico
URO‐TC
topic Renal oncocytoma
Renal cell carcinoma
Diagnosis
URO‐CT
Oncocitoma renal
Carcinoma de células renais
Diagnóstico
URO‐TC
description IntroductionOver the past few years, the increasing use of cross‐sectional imaging, including ultrasound and computed tomography imaging, resulted in an increase incidental diagnosis of renal tumors, especially small renal masses (<4cm). The knowledge that 30% of these masses may be benign, including oncocytomas led to the investigation for more effective methods of diagnosis in order to avoid overtreatment situations.ObjectivesThe authors decided to analyse and compare contrast enhancement patterns of oncocytomas and clear‐cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) to predict histology.Material and methodsBetween 2004‐2015 we retrospectively identified 32 patients with either histological confirmation of renal oncocytoma (N=16) or ccRCC (N=16) who underwent percutaneous biopsy, total or partial nephrectomy. The relative attenuation of solid renal lesions and normal renal cortex was determined in the unenhanced and nephrographic phase. Statistical comparison was carried out by Mann‐Withney test.ResultsThe oncocytomas and cc‐RCC average size was 3.7cm [1.8 to 14] and 3.5cm [1.9 to 8.4], respectively. The average attenuation in the unenhanced phase was 33HU and 32HU, respectively. In nephrographic phase, the average contrast enhancement was 47.5 and 47.4H, respectively. In nephrographic phase, the attenuation difference between the oncocytomas and normal renal cortex was 43.5HU and the attenuation difference between the cc‐RCC and normal renal cortex was 59.7HU. These results were statistically significant (p<0.05).ConclusionsIn the nephrographic phase, URO‐CT reveals that oncocytomas have greater isodensity to the normal renal cortex compared to cc‐RCC. This finding can help us to determine which lesions we should biopsy or not.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-04-11T00:00:00Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.24915/aup.33.3.35
oai:oai.actaurologicaportuguesa.com:article/35
url https://doi.org/10.24915/aup.33.3.35
identifier_str_mv oai:oai.actaurologicaportuguesa.com:article/35
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv http://www.actaurologicaportuguesa.com/index.php/aup/article/view/35
https://doi.org/10.24915/aup.33.3.35
http://www.actaurologicaportuguesa.com/index.php/aup/article/view/35/5
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Portuguesa de Urologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Portuguesa de Urologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Acta Urológica Portuguesa; Vol. 33 No. 3 (2016): Setembro-Dezembro; 98-103
Acta Urológica Portuguesa; v. 33 n. 3 (2016): Setembro-Dezembro; 98-103
2387-0419
2341-4022
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799130427646017536