Usefulness of rapid kV-switching dual energy CT in renal tumor characterization

  • İlkay ÇamlıdağEmail author
  • Mehmet Selim Nural
  • Murat Danacı
  • Ender Özden
Kidneys, Ureters, Bladder, Retroperitoneum



To investigate whether iodine content can discriminate between benign or malignant renal tumors, malign tumor subtypes, low-grade and high-grade tumors on rapid kv-switching dual-energy CT (rsDECT).


This prospective study enrolled 95 patients with renal tumors who underwent rsDECT for tumor characterization between 2016 and 2018. Attenuation on true and virtual unenhanced images, absolute enhancement and enhancement ratio and iodine content of each lesion on nephrographic phase iodine density images were measured. Histopathological diagnosis was obtained following either surgery or core biopsy.


Eighty-five tumors were renal cell carcinoma (RCC) (56 clear cell, 20 papillary, 9 chromophobe) and 10 were benign (6 angiomyolipoma,4 oncocytoma). 46 tumors were low-grade and 23 high-grade. There was significant difference between iodine content of clear cell and non-clear cell (papillary + chromophobe) RCC (p < 0.001). However, no significant iodine content differences were found between papillary and chromophobe RCC, benign and malignant tumors, low-grade and high-grade tumors. The best cut-off iodine content for differentiating clear cell from non-clear cell RCC was 3.2 mg/ml and clear cell from papillary RCC was 2.9 mg/ml with a high sensitivity and specificity. Also, significant difference was found between attenuation values of true and virtual unenhanced images (p = 0.007). Mean iodine content, absolute enhancement and enhancement ratio were highly correlated.


rsDECT contributes to renal tumor characterization by showing higher iodine content in clear cell RCCs compared with non-clear cell RCCs.


Rapid kV-switching dual energy CT Renal tumor Iodine content 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declared no conflicts of interest.


  1. 1.
    Frank I, Blute ML, Cheville JC, Lohse CM, Weaver AL, Zincke H (2003) Solid renal tumors: an analysis of pathological features related to tumor size. The Journal of urology 170:2217–2220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amin M, Tamboli P, Javidan J et al (1998) Prognostic impact of histologic subtyping of adult renal epithelial neoplasms (REN)MODERN PATHOLOGY. LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS 227 EAST WASHINGTON SQ, Philadelphia, PA 19106 USA, pp 75A–75AGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cheville JC, Lohse CM, Zincke H, Weaver AL, Blute ML (2003) Comparisons of outcome and prognostic features among histologic subtypes of renal cell carcinoma. The American Journal of Surgical Pathology 27:612–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bosniak MA (1981) Angiomyolipoma (hamartoma) of the kidney: a preoperative diagnosis is possible in virtually every case. Urologic Radiology 3:135–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim KH, Yun BH, Jung SI, et al. (2013) Usefulness of the ice-cream cone pattern in computed tomography for prediction of angiomyolipoma in patients with a small renal mass. Korean Journal of Urology 54:504–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Choudhary S, Rajesh A, Mayer N, Mulcahy K, Haroon A (2009) Renal oncocytoma: CT features cannot reliably distinguish oncocytoma from other renal neoplasms. Clinical Radiology 64:517–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim JI, Cho JY, Moon KC, Lee HJ, Kim SH (2009) Segmental enhancement inversion at biphasic multidetector CT: characteristic finding of small renal oncocytoma. Radiology 252:441–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Agrawal MD, Pinho DF, Kulkarni NM, Hahn PF, Guimaraes AR, Sahani DV (2014) Oncologic applications of dual-energy CT in the abdomen. Radiographics 34:589–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kaza RK, Ananthakrishnan L, Kambadakone A, Platt JF (2017) Update of dual-energy CT applications in the genitourinary tract. American Journal of Roentgenology 208:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marin D, Boll DT, Mileto A, Nelson RC (2014) State of the art: dual-energy CT of the abdomen. Radiology 271:327–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jacobsen MC, Schellingerhout D, Wood CA, et al. (2017) Intermanufacturer comparison of dual-energy CT iodine quantification and monochromatic attenuation: a phantom study. Radiology 287:224–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ascenti G, Mazziotti S, Mileto A, et al. (2012) Dual-source dual-energy CT evaluation of complex cystic renal masses. American Journal of Roentgenology 199:1026–1034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Graser A, Becker CR, Staehler M, et al. (2010) Single-phase dual-energy CT allows for characterization of renal masses as benign or malignant. Investigative Radiology 45:399–405Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Graser A, Johnson TR, Hecht EM, et al. (2009) Dual-energy CT in patients suspected of having renal masses: can virtual nonenhanced images replace true nonenhanced images? Radiology 252:433–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kaza RK, Caoili EM, Cohan RH, Platt JF (2011) Distinguishing enhancing from nonenhancing renal lesions with fast kilovoltage-switching dual-energy CT. American Journal of Roentgenology 197:1375–1381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jung DC, Oh YT, Kim MD, Park M (2012) Usefulness of the virtual monochromatic image in dual-energy spectral CT for decreasing renal cyst pseudoenhancement: a phantom study. American Journal of Roentgenology 199:1316–1319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tappouni R, Kissane J, Sarwani N, Lehman EB (2012) Pseudoenhancement of renal cysts: influence of lesion size, lesion location, slice thickness, and number of MDCT detectors. American Journal of Roentgenology 198:133–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dai C, Cao Y, Jia Y, et al. (2017) Differentiation of renal cell carcinoma subtypes with different iodine quantification methods using single-phase contrast-enhanced dual-energy CT: areal vs. volumetric analyses. Abdominal Radiology 43:1–7Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mileto A, Marin D, Alfaro-Cordoba M, et al. (2014) Iodine quantification to distinguish clear cell from papillary renal cell carcinoma at dual-energy multidetector CT: a multireader diagnostic performance study. Radiology 273:813–820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zarzour JG, Milner D, Valentin R, et al. (2017) Quantitative iodine content threshold for discrimination of renal cell carcinomas using rapid kV-switching dual-energy CT. Abdominal Radiology 42:727–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Heilbrun ME, Remer EM, Casalino DD, et al. (2015) ACR Appropriateness Criteria indeterminate renal mass. Journal of the American College of Radiology 12:333–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Birnbaum BA, Jacobs JE, Ramchandani P (1996) Multiphasic renal CT: comparison of renal mass enhancement during the corticomedullary and nephrographic phases. Radiology 200:753–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pierorazio PM, Hyams ES, Tsai S, et al. (2013) Multiphasic enhancement patterns of small renal masses (≤ 4 cm) on preoperative computed tomography: utility for distinguishing subtypes of renal cell carcinoma, angiomyolipoma, and oncocytoma. Urology 81:1265–1272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chandarana H, Rosenkrantz AB, Mussi TC, et al. (2012) Histogram analysis of whole-lesion enhancement in differentiating clear cell from papillary subtype of renal cell cancer. Radiology 265:790–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Neville AM, Gupta RT, Miller CM, Merkle EM, Paulson EK, Boll DT (2011) Detection of renal lesion enhancement with dual-energy multidetector CT. Radiology 259:173–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Young JR, Margolis D, Sauk S, Pantuck AJ, Sayre J, Raman SS (2013) Clear cell renal cell carcinoma: discrimination from other renal cell carcinoma subtypes and oncocytoma at multiphasic multidetector CT. Radiology 267:444–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhang J, Lefkowitz RA, Ishill NM, et al. (2007) Solid renal cortical tumors: differentiation with CT. Radiology 244:494–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mileto A, Marin D, Ramirez-Giraldo JC, et al. (2014) Accuracy of contrast-enhanced dual-energy MDCT for the assessment of iodine uptake in renal lesions. American Journal of Roentgenology 202:W466–W474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Borhani AA KM, Iranpour N, Ghodadra A, Sparrow M, Furlan A, Tublin ME (2017) Comparison of true unenhanced and virtual unenhanced (VUE) attenuation values in abdominopelvic single-source rapid kilovoltage-switching spectral CT. Abdominal Radiology (NY) 42:7Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ho LM Marin D, Neville AM, Barnhart HX, Gupta RT, Paulson EK, Boll DT (2012) Characterization of adrenal nodules with dual-energy CT: can virtual unenhanced attenuation values replace true unenhanced attenuation values? American Journal of Roentgenology 198:5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lee HA, Lee YH, Yoon KH, Bang DH, Park DE (2016) Comparison of virtual unenhanced images derived from dual-energy CT with true unenhanced images in evaluation of gallstone disease. American Journal of Roentgenology 2016:6Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of RadiologyOndokuz Mayıs UniversitySamsunTurkey
  2. 2.Department of UrologyOndokuz Mayıs UniversitySamsunTurkey

Personalised recommendations