Skip to main content
Log in

Efficacy of magnetic resonance urography in detecting renal scars in children with vesicoureteral reflux

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The detection of renal scars is of paramount importance for optimal clinical management of patients with urinary tract infection (UTI) and vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy of unenhanced magnetic resonance urography (MRU) and Tc-99m dimercaptosuccinic acid (Tc-DMSA) scintigraphy to dectect renal scars.

Methods

Unenhanced MRU and Tc-DMSA scintigraphy were performed in 49 children (10 boys, 39 girls; mean age 7.4 ± 4.2 years, range 1–15 years) with documented VUR. MR imaging scans were obtained within 7 days after voiding cystourethrogram (VCUG) and Tc-DMSA scintigraphy. The diagnostic performance of MRU in renal scar detection was calculated relative to that of the Tc-DMSA scan.

Results

The renal scar detection rate of Tc-DMSA scintigraphy and unenhanced MRU in kidneys with VUR was 32.4 and 25.9 %, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of MRU in the detection of renal scars was 80 and 82.6 % in kidneys with VUR, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in lesion detection between MRU and Tc-DMSA scintigraphy (P > 0.05). MRU and Tc-DMSA scintigraphy showed good agreement (κ = 0.60).

Conclusions

Unenhanced MRU is a robust technique for the morphologic assessment of the urinary system and detection of renal scars. The lack of radiation and contrast material makes this technique a much safer alternative to scintigraphy in children with VUR, particularly in those who require follow-up scanning and, consequently, considerable radiation exposure.

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

Access this article

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Stefanidis CJ, Siomou E (2007) Imaging strategies for vesicoureteral reflux diagnosis. Pediatr Nephrol 22:937–947

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Orellana P, Baquedano P, Rangarajan V, Zhao JH, Eng ND, Fettich J, Chaiwatanarat T, Sonmezoglu K, Kumar D, Park YH, Samuel AM, Sixt R, Bhatnagar V, Padhy AK (2004) Relationship between acute pyelonephritis, renal scarring, and vesicoureteral reflux. Results of a coordinated research project. Pediatr Nephrol 19:1122–1126

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Polito C, Rambaldi PF, Signoriello G, Mansi L, La Manna A (2006) Permanent renal parenchymal defects after febrile UTI are closely associated with vesicoureteric reflux. Pediatr Nephrol 21:521–526

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. MacKenzie JR (1996) A review of renal scarring in children. Nucl Med Commun 17:176–190

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kovanlikaya A, Okkay N, Cakmakci H, Ozdoğan O, Degirmenci B, Kavukcu S (2004) Comparison of MRI and renal cortical scintigraphy findings in childhood acute pyelonephritis: preliminary experience. Eur J Radiol 49:76–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. White GW, Gibby WA, Tweedle MF (2006) Comparison of Gd (DTPA-BMA) (Omniscan) versus Gd (HP-DO3A) (ProHance) relative to gadolinium retention in human bone tissue by inductively coupled plasma mass spectroscopy. Invest Radiol 41:272–278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. [No authors listed] (1981) Medical versus surgical treatment of primary vesicoureteral reflux: report of the International Reflux Study Committee. Pediatrics 67:392–400

    Google Scholar 

  8. Grattan-Smith JD, Jones RA (2006) MR urography in children. Pediatr Radiol 36:1119–1132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Verswijvel GA, Oyen RH, Van Poppel HP, Goethuys H, Maes B, Vaninbrouckx J, Bosmans H, Marchal G (2000) Magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of urologic disease: an all-in-one approach. Eur Radiol 10:1614–1619

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Garin EH, Campos A, Homsy Y (1998) Primary vesicoureteral reflux: review of current concepts. Pediatr Nephrol 12:249–256

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Yeung CK, Godley ML, Dhillon HK, Gordon I, Duffy PG, Ransley PG (1997) The characteristics of primary vesico-ureteric reflux in male and female infants with pre-natal hydronephrosis. Br J Urol 80:319–327

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee JH, Son CH, Lee MS, Park YS (2006) Vesicoureteral reflux increases the risk of renal scars: a study of unilateral reflux. Pediatr Nephrol 21:1281–1284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chan YL, Chan KW, Yeung CK, Roebuck DJ, Chu WC, Lee KH, Metreweli C (1999) Potential utility of MRI in the evaluation of children at risk of renal scarring. Pediatr Radiol 29:856–862

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kavanagh EC, Ryan S, Awan A, McCourbrey S, O’Connor R, Donoghue V (2005) Can MRI replace DMSA in the detection of renal parenchymal defects in children with urinary tract infections? Pediatr Radiol 35:275–281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Thomsen HS (2008) Is NSF only the tip of the “gadolinium toxicity” iceberg? J Magn Reson Imaging 28:284–286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tweedle MF, Wedeking P, Kumar K (1995) Biodistribution of radiolabeled formulated gadopentetate, gadoteridol, gadoterate and gadodiamide in mice and rats. Invest Radiol 30:372–380

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Selçuk Yüksel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Koçyiğit, A., Yüksel, S., Bayram, R. et al. Efficacy of magnetic resonance urography in detecting renal scars in children with vesicoureteral reflux. Pediatr Nephrol 29, 1215–1220 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00467-014-2766-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00467-014-2766-y

Keywords

Navigation