Abdominal Imaging

, Volume 34, Issue 4, pp 527–540 | Cite as

Magnetic resonance urography

Article

Abstract

Excellent contrast resolution and lack of ionizing radiation make magnetic resonance urography (MRU) a promising technique for noninvasively evaluating the entire urinary tract. While MRU currently lags behind CT urography (CTU) in spatial resolution and efficiency, new hardware and sequence developments have contributed to a resurgence of interest in MRU techniques. By combining unenhanced sequences with multiphase contrast-enhanced and excretory phase imaging, a comprehensive assessment of the kidneys, ureters, bladder, and surrounding structures is possible with image quality rivaling that obtained with other techniques. At the same time, formidable challenges remain to be overcome and further clinical validation is necessary before MRU can replace other forms of urography. In this article, we demonstrate the current potential of MRU to demonstrate a spectrum of urologic pathology involving the kidneys, ureters, and bladder while discussing the limitations and current status of this evolving technique.

Keywords

Magnetic resonance imaging Urography Urinary system Kidney Ureters 

References

  1. 1.
    Nolte-Ersting CCA, Staatz G, Tacke J, et al. (2003) MR urography today. Abdom Imaging 28:191–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Roy C, Saussine C, LeBras Y (1996) Assessment of painful ureterohydronephrosis during pregnancy. Eur Radiol 6:334–338PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Borthne A, Nordshus T, Reiseter T, et al. (1999) MR urography: the future gold standard in pediatric urogenital imaging? Pediatr Radiol 29:694–701PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chahal R, Taylor K, Eardley I, et al. (2005) Patients at high risk for upper tract urothelial cancer: evaluation of hydronephrosis using high resolution magnetic resonance urography. J Urol 174:478–482PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roy C, Saussine C, Jahn V, et al. (1994) Evaluation of RARE-MR urography in the assessment of ureterohydronephrosis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 18:601–608PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Regan F, Bohlman ME, Khazan R, et al. (1996) MR urography using HASTE imaging in the assessment of ureteric obstruction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 167:1115–1120PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roy C, Saussine C, Guth S, et al. (1998) MR urography in the evaluation of urinary tract obstruction. Abdom Imaging 27–34Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karabacakoglu A, Karakose S, Ince O, et al. (2004) Diagnostic value of diuretic-enhanced excretory MR urography in patients with obstructive uropathy. Eur J Radiol 52:320–327PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Avni FE, Nicaise N, Hall M, et al. (2001) The role of MR imaging for the assessment of complicated duplex kidneys in children: preliminary report. Pediatr Radiol 31:215–223PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grattan-Smith JD, Jones RA (2006) MR urography in children. Pediatr Radiol 36:1119–1132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Riccabona M (2004) Pediatric MRU: its potential and its role in the diagnostic work-up of upper urinary tract dilatation in infants and children. World J Urol 22:79–87PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jones RA, Easley K, Little SB, et al. (2005) Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR urography in the evaluation of pediatric hydronephrosis. I. Functional assessment. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185:1598–1607PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sigmund G, Stoever B, Zimmerhackl LB, et al. (1991) RARE-MR-urography in the diagnosis of upper urinary tract abnormalities in children. Pediatr Radiol 21:416–420PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leyendecker J, Barnes C, Zagoria R (2008) MR urography: technique and clinical applications. Radiographics 28:23–48PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hennig J, Friedburg H, Strobel B (1986) Rapid non-tomographic approach to MR myelography without contrast agents. J Comput Assist Tomogr 10:375–378PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hennig J, Nauerth A, Friedburg H (1986) RARE imaging: a fast imaging method for clinical MR. Magn Reson Med 3:823–833PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hennig J, Friedburg H (1988) Clinical applications and methodological developments of the RARE technique. Magn Reson Imaging 6:391–393PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Regan F, Bohlman ME, Khazan R, et al. (1996) MR urography using HASTE imaging in the assessment of ureteric obstruction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 167:1115–1120PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tang Y, Yamashita Y, Namimoto T, et al. (1996) The value of MR urography that uses HASTE sequences to reveal urinary tract disorders. AJR Am J Roentgenol 167:1497–1502PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rothpearl A, Frager D, Subramanian A, et al. (1995) MR urography: technique and preliminary application. Radiology 194:125–130PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hattery R, King B (1995) Technique and application of MR urography. Radiology 194:25PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Colville JA, Killeen RP, Buckley O, et al. (2007) Does a full bladder aid upper tract visualization in magnetic resonance urography? Australas Radiol 51:362–364PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hughes J, Jan W, Goodie J, et al. (2002) MR urography: evaluation of different techniques in non-dilated tracts. Clin Radiol 57:989–994PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nolte-Ernsting C, Adam G, Bucker A, et al. (1997) Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance urography: first experimental results with a polymeric gadolinium blood pool agent. Invest Radiol 32:418–423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nolte-Ernsting C, Bucker A, Adam G, et al. (1998) Gadolinium-enhanced excretory MR urography after low-dose diuretic injection: comparison with conventional excretory urography. Radiology 209:147–157PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Verswijvel GA, Oyen RH, Van Poppel HP, et al. (2000) Magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of urologic disease: an all-in-one approach. Eur Radiol 10:1614–1619PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yoshimitsu K, Irie H, Tajima T, et al. (2004) MR imaging of renal cell carcinoma: its role in determining cell type. Radiat Med 22:371–376PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tsubota M, Takahara T, Nitatori T, et al. (2004) Utility of cine MR urography of the urinary tract and comparison with static MR urography. Radiat Med 22:212–217PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Broome DR, Girguis MS, Baron PW, et al. (2007) Gadodiamide-associated nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: why radiologists should be concerned. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:586–592PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sadowski EA, Bennett LK, Chan MR, et al. (2007) Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: risk factors and incidence estimation. Radiology 242:647–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kanal E, Barkovich AJ, Bell C, et al. (2007) ACR guidance document for safe MR practices: 2007. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Marckmann P, Skov L, Rossen K, et al. (2006) Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: suspected causative role of gadolinium. J Am Soc Nephrol 17:2359–2362PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Grobner T (2006) Gadolinium: a specific trigger for the development of nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis? Nephrol Dial Transplant 21:1104–1108PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ho VB, Choyke PL (2004) MR evaluation of solid renal masses. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 12:413–427PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hallscheidt PJ, Bock M, Riedasch G, et al. (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of staging renal cell carcinomas using multidetector-row computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging: a prospective study with histopathologic correlation. J Comput Assist Tomogr 28:333–339PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Browne RF, Meehan CP, Colville J, et al. (2005) Transitional cell carcinoma of the upper urinary tract: spectrum of imaging findings. Radiographics 25:1609–1627PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wong-You-Cheong JJ, Wagner BJ, Davis CJ Jr (1998) Transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary tract: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics 18:123–142PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pretorius ES, Wickstrom ML, Siegelman ES (2000) MR imaging of renal neoplasms. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 8:813–836PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    El-Diasty T, Mansour O, Farouk A (2003) Diuretic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance urography versus intravenous urography for depiction of nondilated urinary tracts. Abdom Imaging 28:135–145PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Blandino A, Gaeta M, Minutoli F, et al. (2002) MR urography of the ureter. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:1307–1314PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Grattan-Smith JD, Jones RA (2006) MR urography in children. Pediatr Radiol 36:1119–1132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Riccabona M, Simsbrunner J, Ring E, et al. (2002) Feasibility of MR-urography in neonates and infants with abnormalities of the upper urinary tract. Eur Radiol 12:1442–1450PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sudah M, Vanninen R, Partanen K, et al. (2001) MR urography in evaluation of acute flank pain: T2-weighted sequences and gadolinium-enhanced three-dimensional FLASH compared with urography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176:105–112PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Shokeir AA, El Diasty T, Essa W, et al. (2004) Diagnosis of ureteral obstruction in patients with compromised renal function: the role of noninvasive imaging modalities. J Urol 171:2303–2306PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Spencer JA, Chahal R, Kelly A, et al. (2004) Evaluation of painful hydronephrosis in pregnancy: magnetic resonance urographic patterns in physiological dilatation versus calculous obstruction. J Urol 171:256–260PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Grenier N, Pariente JL, Trillaud H, et al. (2000) Dilatation of the collecting system during pregnancy: physiologic vs. obstructive dilatation. Eur Radiol 10:271–279PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Tekes A, Kamel I, Imam K, et al. (2005) Dynamic MRI of bladder cancer: Evaluation of staging accuracy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:121–127PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Barentsz JO, Jager GJ, Witjes JA, et al. (1996) Primary staging of urinary bladder carcinoma: the role of MRI and a comparison with CT. Eur Radiol 6:129–133PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Kim B, Semelka RC, Ascher SM, et al. (1994) Bladder tumor staging: comparison of contrast-enhanced CT, T1- and T2-weighted MR imaging, dynamic gadolinium-enhanced imaging, and late gadolinium-enhanced imaging. Radiology 193:239–245PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Tekes A, Kamel IR, Imam K, et al. (2003) MR imaging features of transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:771–777PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Barentsz JO, Jager GJ, van Vierzen PBJ, et al. (1996) Staging urinary bladder cancer after transurethral biopsy: the value of fast dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 201:185–193PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kundra V, Silverman P (2003) Imaging in the diagnosis, staging, and follow-up of cancer of the urinary bladder. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:1045–1054PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Garcia-Valtuille R, Garcia-Valtuille AI, Abascal F, et al. (2006) Magnetic resonance urography: a pictorial overview. Br J Radiol 79:614–626PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Leyendecker JR, Childs DD (2007) Kidneys and MR urography (3T vs. 1.5T). Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 15:373–382PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of RadiologyWake Forest University School of MedicineWinston-SalemUSA

Personalised recommendations