Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Renal cell carcinoma: applicability of the apparent coefficient of the diffusion-weighted estimated by MRI for improving their differential diagnosis, histologic subtyping, and differentiation grade

  • Urology - Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) represents the most common malignant epithelial neoplasm of the kidney. Accurate assessment of the renal masses, defining the histologic subtype and the grade of differentiation of the tumor, is vital to ensure an adequate case management as well as for staging and prognosis. Recently, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) tends to be increasingly appealing for the clinicians as an imaging procedure of choice for the diagnosis and staging of the RCC, which is predetermined by several advantages over CT. The goal of the survey was to assess the applicability of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) of the DWI MRI for the differential diagnostics, histologic subtyping, and defining the grade of differentiation of the RCC.

Methods

The study enrolled 288 adult patients with renal lesions: 188 patients with solid RCC—126 patients with clear cell subtype (ccRCC), 32 patients with papillary RCC (pRCC), 30 patients with chromophobe RCC (chRCC); 27 patient with cystic form or RCC (Bosniak cyst, category IV); 32 patients with renal angiomyolipoma (AML); 25 patients with renal oncocytoma (OC); and 16 patients with the renal abscess (AB). In total, 245 lesions were pathologically verified. As a reference, 19 healthy volunteers were included into the study. All patients underwent MRI of the kidneys, involving DWI with subsequent evaluation of the ADC.

Results

There was a reliable difference (p < 0.05) in mean ADC values between the normal renal parenchyma (NRP), solid RCC of different histologic subtypes and grades, cystic RCC, and benign renal lesions. The mean ADC values obtained in the result of the study were (×10−3 mm2/s): 2.47 ± 0.12 in NRP, 1.63 ± 0.29 in all solid RCCs, 1.82 ± 0.22 in solid ccRCC (1.92 ± 0.11—Fuhrman grade I, 1.84 ± 0.14—Fuhrman grade II, 1.79 ± 0.10—Fuhrman grade III, 1.72 ± 0.06—Fuhrman grade IV), 1.61 ± 0.07 in pRCC, 1.46 ± 0.09 in chRCC, 2.68 ± 0.11 in cystic RCC, 2.13 ± 0.08 in AML, 2.26 ± 0.06 in OC, and 3.30 ± 0.07 in AB.

Conclusion

The data received in our study demonstrate a substantial restriction of diffusion of hydrogen molecules in tissues of ccRCC in comparison with the healthy renal parenchyma preconditioned by the greater density of tumor. A statistically significant difference in mean ADC values of ccRCC with different grades of nuclear pleomorphism by Fuhrman was observed: Low-grade tumors showed higher mean ADC values compared to high-grade tumors. The modality of the MRI DWI along with ADC measurement allows to reliably differentiate between the solid RCC of main histologic subtypes and grades, cystic RCC, and the benign renal lesions.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AB:

Renal abscess

ADC:

Apparent diffusion coefficient

AML:

Angiomyolipoma

ccRCC:

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma

chRCC:

Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma

CT:

Computed tomography

DWI:

Diffusion-weighted images

FIESTA FAT SAT:

Fast imaging employing steady-state acquisition with fat saturation

FRFSE:

Fast-recovery fast spin-echo

FSPGR-DE:

Fast spoiled gradient-recalled echo dual-echo

LAVA:

Liver acquisition with volume acquisition

MRI:

Magnetic resonance imaging

NRP:

Normal renal parenchyma

OC:

Oncocytoma

pRCC:

Papillary renal cell carcinoma

RCC:

Renal cell carcinoma

RCC:

Renal cell carcinoma

ROI:

Region of interest

SNR:

Signal-to-noise ratio

SSFSE:

Single-shot fast spin-echo

TE:

Echo time

TR:

Repetition time

References

  1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Thun MJ (2009) Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin 59:225–249

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cheville JC, Lohse CM, Zincke H, Weaver AL, Blute ML (2003) Comparisons of outcome and prognostic features among histologic subtypes of renal cell carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 27:612–624

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Miguel V, Fernando L, Carlos M et al (2009) Nuclear grade prediction of renal cell carcinoma using contrasted computed tomography. J Urol 181:249

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kim JK, Kim TK, Ahn HJ, Kim CS, Kim KR, Cho KS (2002) Differentiation of subtypes of renal cell carcinoma on helical CT scans. AJR Am J Roentgenol 178:1499–1506

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Sheir KZ, El-Azab M, Mosbah A, El-Baz M, Shaaban AA (2005) Differentiation of renal cell carcinoma subtypes by multislice computerized tomography. J Urol 174:451–455

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Moinzadeh A, Gill IS, Finelli A, Kaouk J, Desai M (2006) Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: 3-year followup. J Urol 175:459–462

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Le Bihan D (1991) Molecular diffusion nuclear magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson 7:1–30

    Google Scholar 

  8. Pedrosa I, Sun MR, Spencer M, Genega EM, Olumi AF, Dewolf WC, Rofsky NM (2008) MR imaging of renal masses: correlation with findings at surgery and pathologic analysis. Radiographics 28:985–1003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Taouli B, Thakur RK, Mannelli L, Babb JS, Kim S, Hecht EM, Lee VS, Israel GM (2009) Renal lesions: characterization with diffusion-weighted imaging versus contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology 251:398–407

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sandrasegaran K, Sundaram CP, Ramaswamy R, Akisik FM, Rydberg MP, Lin C, Aisen AM (2010) Usefulness of diffusion-weighted imaging in the evaluation of renal masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:438–445

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kanal E (2016) Gadolinium based contrast agents (GBCA): safety overview after 3 decades of clinical experience. Magn Reson Imaging. doi:10.1016/j.mri.2016.08.017

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. McDonald RJ, McDonald JS, Bida JP, Carter RE, Fleming CJ, Misra S, Williamson EE, Kallmes DF (2016) Intravenous contrast material-induced nephropathy: causal or coincident phenomenon? Radiology 278:306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wang H, Cheng L, Zhang X, Wang D, Guo A, Gao Y, Ye H (2010) Renal cell carcinoma: diffusion-weighted mr imaging for subtype differentiation at 3.0 T. Radiology 257:135–143

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Razek AA, Farouk A, Mousa A, Nabil N (2011) Role of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in characterization of renal tumors. J Comput Assist Tomogr 35:332–336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sun M, Lughezzani G, Jeldres C, Isbarn H, Shariat SF, Arjane P, Widmer H, Pharand D, Latour M, Perrotte P, Patard JJ, Karakiewicz PI (2009) A proposal for reclassification of the Fuhrman grading system in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 56:775–781

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hong SK, Jeong CW, Park JH, Kim HS, Kwak C, Choe G, Kim HH, Lee SE (2011) Application of simplified Fuhrman grading system in clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. BJU Int 107:409–415

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rosenkrantz AB, Niver BE, Fitzgerald EF, Babb JS, Chandarana H, Melamed J (2010) Utility of the apparent diffusion coefficient for distinguishing clear cell renal cell carcinoma of low and high nuclear grade. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:W344–W351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mytsyk Y, Borys Y, Komnatska I, Dutka I, Shatynska-Mytsyk I (2014) Value of the diffusion-weighted MRI in the differential diagnostics of malignant and benign kidney neoplasms—our clinical experience. Pol J Radiol 79:290–295

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Lassel EA, Rao R, Schwenke C, Schoenberg SO, Michaely HJ (2014) Diffusion-weighted imaging of focal renal lesions: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 24:241–249

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhang H, Gan Q, Wu Y, Liu R, Liu X, Huang Z, Yuan F, Kuang M, Song B (2016) Diagnostic performance of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in differentiating human renal lesions (benignity or malignancy): a meta-analysis. Abdom Radiol (NY) 41:1997–2010

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Yulian Mytsyk, Katarina Gazdikova or Peter Kruzliak.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mytsyk, Y., Dutka, I., Borys, Y. et al. Renal cell carcinoma: applicability of the apparent coefficient of the diffusion-weighted estimated by MRI for improving their differential diagnosis, histologic subtyping, and differentiation grade. Int Urol Nephrol 49, 215–224 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-016-1460-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-016-1460-3

Keywords

Navigation