Advertisement

Abdominal Radiology

, Volume 44, Issue 1, pp 239–246 | Cite as

High signal renal tumors on DWI: the diagnostic value of morphological characteristics

  • Hongtao Zhang
  • Jingjing Pan
  • Yanguang Shen
  • Xu Bai
  • Yingwei Wang
  • Haiyi WangEmail author
  • Huiyi YeEmail author
Article
  • 63 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the usefulness of morphological characteristics of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) for differentiating malignant renal tumors from benign renal tumors, and clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) from non-clear cell RCC at 3.0 T.

Methods

The study included 249 patients with 251 histopathologically confirmed renal tumors that showed high signal on DWI. For each tumor, two radiologists independently evaluated apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values and morphological characteristics of DWI. The differences in the quantitative and qualitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features determined by the readers were assessed. The ADC values between malignant and benign renal tumors and between clear cell and non-clear cell RCC were compared using Mann–Whitney tests. The proportional differences of morphological characteristics of DWI between malignant and benign renal tumors and between clear cell and non-clear cell RCC were compared using Chi-square tests.

Results

There were no significant differences in the quantitative and qualitative MRI features determined by the readers. The ADC values for malignant renal tumors were statistically significantly higher than those for benign renal tumors (p < 0.05), and the ADC values for clear cell RCC were statistically significantly higher than those for non-clear cell RCC (p < 0.05). The proportion of morphological characteristics of DWI between malignant and benign renal tumors was statistically significantly different at ring, nodular, flaky high signal. The proportion of morphological characteristics of DWI between clear cell and non-clear cell RCC was statistically significantly different at uniform high signal.

Conclusions

The morphological characteristics of DWI are useful in differentiating renal tumors.

Keywords

Renal tumors Diffusion-weighted imaging, DWI Magnetic resonance imaging, MRI Morphological characteristics 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

This study was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81771785 and 81471641). The funders had no role in research design, data collection, and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

References

  1. 1.
    Sun M, Thuret R, Abdollah F, et al. (2011) Age-adjusted incidence, mortality, and survival rates of stage-specific renal cell carcinoma in North America: a trend analysis. Eur Urol 59(1):135–141.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2010.10.029 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hollingsworth JM, Miller DC, Daignault S, et al. (2006) Rising incidence of small renal masses:a need to reassess treatment effect. J Natl Cancer Inst 98(18):1331–1334.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djj362 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cornelis F, Tricaud E, Lasserre AS, et al. (2014) Routinely performed multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging helps to differentiate common subtypes of renal tumours. Eur Radiol 24(5):1068–1080.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3107-z Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beck SD, Patel MI, Snyder ME, et al. (2004) Effect of papillary and chromophobe cell type on disease-free survival after nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 11(1):71–77Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Leibovich BC, Lohse CM, Crispen PL, et al. (2010) Histological subtype is an independent predictor of outcome for patients with renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 183(4):1309–1315.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.12.035 Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang J, Tehrani YM, Wang L, et al. (2008) Renal masses: characterization with diffusion-weighted MR imaging-a preliminary experience. Radiology 247(2):458–464.  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2472070823 Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Taouli B, Thakur RK, Mannelli L, et al. (2009) Renal lesions: characterization with diffusion-weighted imaging versus contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 251(2):398–407.  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2512080880 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ginat DT, Mangla R, Yeaney G, et al. (2012) Diffusion-weighted imaging for differentiating benign from malignant skull lesions and correlation with cell density. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198(6):W597–W601.  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.11.7424 Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim S, Jain M, Harris AB, et al. (2009) T1 hyperintense renal lesions: characterization with diffusion-weighted MR imaging versus contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 251(3):796–807.  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2513080724 Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sandrasegaran K, Sundaram CP, Ramaswamy R, et al. (2010) Usefulness of diffusion-weighted imaging in the evaluation of renal masses. AJR Am J Roentqenol 194(2):438–445.  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.3024 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang H, Cheng L, Zhang X, et al. (2010) Renal cell carcinoma: diffusion-weighted MR imaging for subtype differentiation at 3.0 T. Radiology 257(1):135–143.  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10092396 Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yu X, Lin M, Ouyang H, et al. (2012) Application of ADC measurement in a characterization of renal cell carcinomas with different pathological types and grades by 3.0T diffusion weighted MRI. Eur J Radiol 81(11):3061–3066.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.04.028 Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cornelis F, Tricaud E, Lasserre AS, et al. (2015) Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for the differentiation of low and high grade clear cell renal carcinoma. European radiology 25(1):24–31.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3380-x Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sevcenco S, Heinz-Peer G, Ponhold L, et al. (2014) Utility and limitations of 3-Tesla diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for differentiation of renal tumors. Eur J Radiol 83(6):909–913.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.02.026 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Razek AA, Farouk A, Mousa A, et al. (2011) Role of diffusionweighted magnetic resonance imaging in characterization of renal tumors. J Comput Assist Tomogr 35(3):332–336.  https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0b013e318219fe76 Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lassel EA, Rao R, Schwenke C, et al. (2014) Diffusion-weighted imaging of focal renal lesions: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 24(1):241–249.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-3004-x Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goya C, Hamidi C, Bozkurt Y, et al. (2015) The role of apparent diffusion coefficient quantification in differentiating benign and malignant renal masses by 3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging. Balkan Med J 32(3):273–278.  https://doi.org/10.5152/balkanmedj.2015.15475 Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Inci E, Hocaoglu E, Aydin S, et al. (2012) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in evaluation of primary solid and cystic renal masses using the Bosniak classification. Eur J Radiol 81(5):815–820.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.02.024 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mirka H, Korcakova E, Kastner J, et al. (2015) Diffusion-weighted imaging using 3.0 T MRI as a possible biomarker of renal tumors. Anticancer Res 35(4):2351–2357Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kang SK, Zhang A, Pandharipande PV, et al. (2015) DWI for renal mass characterization: systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test performance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205(2):317–324.  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.13930 Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lei Y, Wang H, Li HF, et al. (2015) Diagnostic significance of diffusion weighted MRI in renal cancer. Biomed Res Int 2015:172165.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/172165 Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mirka H, Korcakova E, Kastner J, et al. (2015) Diffusion-weighted imaging using 3.0 T MRI as a possible biomarker of renal tumors. Anticancer Res 35(4):2351–2357Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hotker AM, Mazaheri Y, Wibmer A, et al. (2016) Use of DWI in the differentiation of renal cortical tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 206(1):100–105.  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.13923 Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Aziz SA, Sznol J, Adeniran A, et al. (2013) Vascularity of primary and metastatic renal cell carcinoma specimens. J Transl Med 11:15.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5876-11-15 Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rheinheimer S, Stieltjes B, Schneider F, et al. (2012) Investigation of renal lesions by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging applying intravoxel incoherent motion-derived parameters: initial experience. Eur J Radiol 81(3):e310–e316.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.10.016 Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chandarana H, Kang SK, Wong S, et al. (2012) Diffusion-weighted intravoxel incoherent motion imaging of renal tumors with histopathologic correlation. Invest Radiol 47(12):688–696.  https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e31826a0a49 Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Thoeny HC, De Keyzer F (2007) Extracranial applications of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 17(6):1385–1393.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0547-0 Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Goyal A, Sharma R, Bhalla AS, et al. (2012) Diffusion-weighted MRI in renal cell carcinoma: A surrogate marker for predicting nuclear grade and histological subtype. Acta Radiol 53(3):349–358.  https://doi.org/10.1258/ar.2011.110415 Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tanaka H, Yoshida S, Fujii Y, et al. (2011) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the differentiation of angiomyolipoma with minimal fat from clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Int J Urol 18(10):727–730.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2011.02824.x Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    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(1):W21–W28.  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.15.14666 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of RadiologyChinese PLA General HospitalBeijingChina
  2. 2.Department of Radiology307 Hospital, PLABeijingChina
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyGeneral Hospital of the PLA Rocket ForceBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations