Skip to main content

The Kidney

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 825 Accesses

Abstract

The applications of the use of second generation CM in the field of renal pathology includes the following types of diseases: ischemic, traumatic, inflammatory and expansive (the latter includes both cystic and solid masses). Another use is in cases of kidney transplants, in which software is now available to give a quantitative analysis that can define levels of parenchymal perfusion and determine the Intensity/Time curves.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Siracusano S, Bertolotto M, Ciciliato S et al (2011) The current role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) imaging in the evaluation of renal pathology. World J Urol 29:633–638

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bertolotto M, Martegani A, Aiani L et al (2008) Value of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for detecting renal infarcts proven by contrast enhanced CT-a feasibility study. Eur Radiol 18:376–383

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Nicolau C, Ripollés T (2011) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in abdominal imaging. Abdom Imaging 37:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Setola SV, Catalano O, Sandomenico F, Siani A (2007) Contrastenhanced sonography of the kidney. Abdom Imaging 32:21–28

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Piscaglia F, Nolsøe C, Dietrich CF et al (2012) The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical practice of Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS): update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. Ultraschall Med 33:33–59

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Valentino M, Serra C, Zironi G et al (2006) Blunt abdominal trauma:emergency contrast-enhanced sonography for detection of solid organ injuries. Am J Roentgenol 186:1361–1367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Regine G, Atzori M, Miele V et al (2007) Second-generation sonographic contrast agents in the evaluation of renal trauma. Radiol Med 112:581–587

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Valentino M, Ansaloni L, Catena F et al (2009) Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in blunt abdominal trauma: considerations after 5 years of experience. Radiol Med 114:1080–1193

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Claudon M, Cosgrove D, Albrecht T et al (2008) Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound(CEUS), update 2008. Ultraschall Med 29:28–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Sebastia C, Quiroga S, Boyè R et al (2001) Helical CT in renal transplantation: normal findings and early and late complications. Radiographics 21:1103–1117

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Allan PL, Dubbins PA, Pozniak MA et al (2006) Doppler ultrasoundevaluation of transplantation. In: Allan PL, Dubbins PA, PozniakMA et al (eds) Clinical doppler ultrasound, 2nd edn. Churchill Livingstone Elsevier, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  12. Brown ED, Chen MY, Wolfman NT et al (2000) Complications of renal transplantation: evaluation with US and radionuclide imaging. Radiographics 20:607–622

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Akbar SA, Jafri SZ, Amendola MA et al (2005) Complications of renal transplantation. Radiographics 25:1335–1356

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wilson SR, Burns PN (2010) Microbubble-enhanced US in body imaging: what role? Radiology 257:24–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Quaia E (2007) Microbubble ultrasound contrast agents: an update. Eur Radiol 17:1995–2008

    Google Scholar 

  16. Schwenger V, Korosoglou G, Hinkel UP et al (2006) Real-time contrast-enhanced sonography of renal transplant recipients predicts chronic allograft nephropathy. Am J Transplant 6:609–615

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Fontanilla T, Minaya J, Cortes C et al (2012) Acute complicated pyelonephritis: contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Abdom Imaging 37(4):639–646

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mitterberger M, Pinggera GM, Colleselli D et al (2008) Acute pyelonephritis: comparison of diagnosis with computed tomography and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. BJU Int 101:341–344

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Prakash A, Tan GJ, Wansaicheong GK (2011) Contrast enhanced ultrasound of kidneys. pictorial essay. Med Ultrason 13:150–156

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Gerst S, Hamm LE, Li D et al (2011) Evaluation of renal masses with contrast-enhanced ultrasound: initial experience. Am J Roentgenol 197:897–906

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ignee A, Straub B, Schuessler G et al (2010) Contrast enhanced ultrasound of renal masses. World J Radiol 2:15–31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Quaia E, Bussani R, Cova M et al (2005) Radiologic-pathologic correlationsof intratumoral tissue components in the most common solid and cystic renal tumors. pictorial review. Eur Radiol 15:1734–1744

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Xu HX (2009) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: the evolving applications. World J Radiol 1:15–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Siracusano S, Quaia E, Bertolotto M et al (2004) The application of ultrasound contrast agents in the characterization of renal tumors. World J Urol 22:316–322

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Jiang J, Chen Y, Zhou Y, Zhang H (2010) Clear cell renal cell carcinoma:contrast-enhanced ultrasound features relation to tumor size. Eur J Radiol 73:162–167

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wink MH, de la Rosette JJ, Laguna P et al (2007) Ultrasonographyof renal masses using contrast pulse sequence imaging: a pilot study. J Endourol 21:466–472

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Xu ZF, Xu HX, Xie XY et al (2010) Renal cell carcinoma and renal angiomyolipoma: differential diagnosis with real time contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. J Ultrasound Med 29:709–717

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Fan L, Lianfang D, Jinfang X et al (2008) Diagnostic efficacy of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in solid renal parenchymal lesions with maximum diameters of 5 cm. J Ultrasound Med 27:875–885

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Roy C, Gengler L, Sauer B, Lang H (2008) Role of contrast enhanced US in the evaluation of renal tumors. J Radiol 89:1735–1744

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Tamai H, Takiguchi Y, Oka M et al (2005) Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the diagnosis of solid renal tumors. J Ultrasound Med 24:1635–1640

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Xu ZF, Xu HX, Xie XY et al (2010) Renal cell carcinoma: real timecontrast enhanced ultrasound findings. Abdom Imaging 35:750–756

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ascenti G, Mazziotti S, Zimbaro G et al (2007) Complex cystic renal masses:characterization with contrast-enhanced. Radiology 243:158–165

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Nicolau C, Bunesch L, Sebastia C (2011) Renal complex cysts in adults: contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Abdom Imaging 36:742–752

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Park BK, Kim B, Kim SH et al (2007) Assessment of cystic renal masses based on Bosniak classification: comparison of CT and contrast-enhanced US. Eur J Radiol 61:310–314

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Israel GM, Bosniak MA (2005) How i do it: evaluating renal masses. Radiology 236:441–450

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Quaia E, Bertolotto M, Cioffi V et al (2008) Comparison of contrast-enhanced sonography with unenhanced sonography and contrast-enhanced CT in the diagnosis of malignancy in complex cystic renal masses. Am J Roentgenol 191:1239–1249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Clevert DA, Minaifar N, Weckbach S et al (2008) Multislice computed tomography versus contrast-enhanced ultrasound in evaluation of complex cystic renal masses using the Bosniak classification system. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 39:171–178

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Bhatt S, MacLennan G, Dogra V (2007) Renal pseudotumors. Am J Roentgenol 188:1380–1387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Regine G, Atzori M, Danza FM (2010) Malformazioni del rene edelle vie urinary. In: Blandino A, Danza FM, Menchi I et al (eds) Imaging dell’apparato urogenitale. Springer, Milano, pp 13–24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  40. Mazziotti S, Zimbaro F, Pandolfo A et al (2010) Usefulness of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in the diagnosis of renal pseudotumors. Abdom Imaging 35:241–245

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giovanni Regine .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Regine, G., Atzori, M., Fabbri, R. (2013). The Kidney. In: Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound of the Urinary Tract. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-5432-5_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-5432-5_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-5430-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-5432-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics