Advertisement

La radiologia medica

, 116:1095 | Cite as

Renal volume assessment with 3D ultrasound

  • A. Brancaforte
  • S. SerantoniEmail author
  • F. Silva Barbosa
  • G. Di Leo
  • F. Sardanelli
  • G. P. Cornalba
Genitourinary Radiology / Radiologia Genito-Urinaria

Abstract

Purpose

This study was undertaken to determine the accuracy of 3D ultrasound (US) in assessing renal volume, with multislice computed tomography (MSCT) considered as the gold standard.

Materials and methods

Forty-nine patients (30 men, 19 women; age range 30–82 years) underwent abdominal contrast-enhanced MSCT and 3D-US performed with a 3.5-MHz 3D/4D convex-array probe. The results of the two modalities were compared with the Wilcoxon test. Variability between the two measurements was determined with the Bland-Altman method and reported in terms of bias and coefficient of repeatability (CoR).

Results

Mean values obtained were 210 ml with MSCT and 192 ml with 3D-US (p<0.001). Analysis of variability per patient between MSCT and 3D-US showed a bias of 19 ml, a CoR of 47 ml and an accuracy of 78%, with an average 3D-US underestimation of 19 ml (9%). Analysis of variability per kidney showed a bias of 9 ml, a CoR of 34 ml and an accuracy of 80%.

Conclusions

Three-dimensional US is a valuable technique for monitoring renal volume, whereas MSCT may be reserved for assessing renal anatomy and relationships with neighbouring organs.

Keywords

Ultrasound 3DMSCT Renal volume 

Determinazione del volume renale con ecotomografia 3D

Riassunto

Obiettivo

Scopo del nostro lavoro è stato valutare l’accuratezza dell’ecotomografia 3D nella volumetria renale, considerando la tomografia computerizzata multistrato (TCMS) come standard di riferimento.

Materiali e metodi

Quarantanove pazienti (30 maschi;19 donne; età 30–82), sono stati sottoposti a TCMS dell’addome con somministrazione di mezzo di contrasto (MdC) ed a ecografia con sonda Convex volumetrica 3D/4D con tecnologia elettromeccanica. Si è effettuato confronto tra i valori ottenuti alla TCMS e quelli ecografici 3D con il test Wilcoxon. La variabilità tra le due misure è stata stimata col metodo Bland-Altman ed è stata riportata in termini di bias e coefficiente di ripetibilità (CoR).

Risultati

I valori medi misurati alla TC sono di 210 ml e all’ecotomografia 3D sono di 192 ml, p<0,001. Dall’analisi di variabilità per paziente tra la TCMS e l’ecotomografia 3D risulta: bias=19 ml, CoR=47 ml, accuratezza=78%. Da questi dati ne deriva una sottostima media da parte dell’ecotomografia di 19 ml (9%). Dall’analisi di variabilità per rene è risultato: bias=9 ml, CoR=34 ml e l’accuratezza=80%.

Conclusioni

La volumetria 3D rappresenta una valida metodica nel monitoraggio del volume renale nel tempo, mentre la TCMS può essere riservata ai casi in cui occorra una valutazione panoramica dell’anatomia renale e dei rapporti con gli organi circostanti.

Parole chiave

Ecotomografia 3D Volumetria renale TCMS 

References/Bibliografia

  1. 1.
    Absy M, Metreweli C, Matthews C, Al KA (1987) Changes in transplanted kidney volume measured by ultrasound. Brit J Radiol 60:525–529PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nicholson ML, Windmill DC, Horsburgh T, Harris KP (2000) Influence of allograft size to recipient body-weight ratio on the long-term outcome of renal transplantation. Br J Surg 87:314–319PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Binkert CA, Hoffman U, Leung DA et al (1999) Characterization of renal artery stenoses based on magnetic resonance renal flow and volume measurements. Kidney Int 56:1846–1854PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rasmussen SN, Haase L, Kjeldsen H, Hancke S (1978) Determination of renal volume by ultrasound scanning. J Clin Ultrasound 6:160–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hricak H, Lieto RP (1983) Sonographic determination of renal volume. Radiology 148:311–312PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chang SL, Caruso TJ, Shortliffe LD (2007) Magnetic resonance imaging detected renal volume reduction in refluxing and nonrefluxing kidneys. J Urol 178:2550–2554PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wong IY, Copp HL, Clark CJ et al (2009) Quantitative ultrasound renal parenchymal area correlates with renal volume and identifies reflux nephropathy. J Urol 182:1683–1687PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cheong B, Muthupillai R, Rubin MF, Flamm SD (2007) Normal values for renal length and volume as measured by magnetic resonance imaging. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2:38–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Emamian SA, Nielsen MB, Pedersen JF, Ytte L (1993) Kidney dimensions at sonography: correlation with age, sex, and habitus in 665 adult volunteers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 160:83–86PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bakker J, Olree M, Kaatee R et al (1999) Renal volume measurements: accuracy and repeatability of US compared with that of MR imaging. Radiology 211:623–628PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bakker J, Olree M, Kaatee R et al (1998) In vitro measurement of kidney size: comparison of ultrasonography and MRI. Ultrasound Med Biol 24:683–688PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    King BF, Reed JE, Bergstralh EJ et al (2000) Quantification and longitudinal trends of kidney, renal cyst, and renal parenchyma volumes in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease. J Am Soc Nephrol 11:1505–1511PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gremigni D, Todescan GC, Giannardi G et al (1984) Renal volume and human somatic type. Boll Soc Ital Biol Sper 60:887–893PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kotre CJ, Owen JP (1994) Method for the evaluation of renal parenchymal volume by X-ray computed tomography. Med Biol Eng Comput 32:338–341PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lerman LO, Bentley MD, Bell MR et al (1990) Quantitation of the in vivo kidney volume with cine computed tomography. Invest Radiol 25:1206–1211PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lerman LO, Flickinger AL, Sheedy PF, Turner ST (1996) Reproducibility of human kidney perfusion and volume determinations with electron beam computed tomography. Invest Radiol 31:204–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nawaratne S, Fabiny R, Brien JE et al (1997) Accuracy of volume measurement using helical CT. J Comput Assist Tomogr 21:481–486PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Emamian SA, Nielsen MB, Pedersen JF, Ytte L (1993) Sonographic evaluation of renal appearance in 665 adult volunteers. Correlation with age and obesity. Acta Radiol 34:482–485PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim HC, Yang DM, Lee SH, Cho YD (2008) Usefulness of renal volume measurements obtained by a 3-dimensional sonographic transducer with matrix electronic arrays. J Ultrasound Med 27:1673–1681PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Edell SL, Kurtz AB, Rifkin MD (1990) Normal renal ultrasound measurements. In: Goldberg BB, Kurtz AB (eds) Atlas of ultrasound measurements. Mosby-Year Book, Chigago, pp 146–160Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cochlin DL (1998) Urinary tract. In: Goldberg BB, McGahan JP (eds) Diagnostic ultrasound: a logical approach. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, pp 788–859Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Geraghty EM, Boone JM, McGahan JP, Jain K (2004) Normal organ volume assessment from abdominal CT. Abdom Imaging 29:482–490PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shin HS, Chung BH, Lee SE et al (2009) Measurement of kidney volume with multi-detector computed tomography scanning in young Korean. Yonsei Med J 50:262–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Coulam CH, Bouley DM, Sommer FG (2002) Measurement of renal volumes with contrast-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 15:174–179PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Disler DG, Marr DS, Rosenthal DI (1994) Accuracy of volume measurements of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging phantoms by three-dimensional reconstruction and preliminary clinical application. Invest Radiol 29:739–745PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Brancaforte
    • 1
  • S. Serantoni
    • 1
    Email author
  • F. Silva Barbosa
    • 1
  • G. Di Leo
    • 2
  • F. Sardanelli
    • 2
    • 3
  • G. P. Cornalba
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Radiologia Diagnostica ed InterventisticaUniversità degli Studi di Milano, Ospedale San PaoloMilanoItaly
  2. 2.Unità di RadiologiaIRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Piazza E. Malan, San Donato MilaneseMilanoItaly
  3. 3.Dipartimento di Scienze Medico-ChirurgicheUniversità degli Studi di MilanoMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations