Skip to main content
Log in

Filling defect artefacts in magnetic resonance urography

  • Urogenital
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of filling defect artefacts (FDA) in magnetic resonance urography (MRU). Retrospectively, we assessed MRU examinations of 45 patients with neurogenic bladder dysfunction (21 men, 24 women; mean age 35 years, age range 18–71 years). The MRU was performed 30 min after intramuscular injection of 20 mg frusemide using heavily T2-weighted fast-spin-echo techniques [axial, thick coronal slab, coronal maximum intensity projection (MIP) images] with fat saturation. The images were reviewed by two observers to determine the presence of filling defects and dilatation of pelvicalyceal system and ureters. The filling defects were classified into central, eccentric and complete. Clinical course and plain films were reviewed to determine significance of the detected filling defects. True filling defects were observed in 5 patients (11%) and all due to stones seen on the plain radiograph of the abdomen. Filling defects artefacts (FDAs) were seen in 23 patients (51%; 17 pelvicalyceal system, 17 upper third of ureters, 7 mid ureters and 1 distal ureter). No stones were seen on the plain radiograph of these patients and they had a favourable clinical course for over 24 months. The true filling defects were large in size, eccentric in position and seen in more than one sequence of the MRU examination (axial, n=5; slab, n=5; and MIP, n=4). Four (80%) of the patients with true defects and 21 (91%) of those with FDAs had dilatation of the pelvicalyceal system and ureters. The FDAs were small in size, centrally placed (74%) and always seen in axial images, rarely in slab images (2 cases) and not seen in MIP images. Artefactual filling defects can be seen in MRU examinations. The cause of the FDAs is not fully explained and could be secondary to turbulent and fast flow of the urine. Some of the FDAs seen in the calyces could be due to the tips of the papillae. Awareness of such defects obviates misinterpretation and prevents unnecessary further investigations or interventions.

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. 3a, b.
Fig. 4a, b.
Fig. 5a, b.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rothpearl A, Frager D, Subramanian A et al. (1995) MR urography technique and application. Radiology 194:125–130

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tang Y, Yamashita Y, Namimoto et al. (1996) The value of MR urography that uses HASTE sequences to reveal urinary tract disorders. AJR 167:1497–1502

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Regan F, Bohlman ME, Khazan R, Rodriguez R, Schultze-Haakh H (1996) MR urography using HASTE imaging in the assessment of ureteric obstruction. AJR 167:1115–1120

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Malloy M, Soto J, Yucel EK, Hussain (1997) MR urography: evaluation of a three-dimensional fast spin-echo technique in patients with hydronephrosis. AJR 168:387–392

    Google Scholar 

  5. Roy C, Saussine C, Guth S et al. (1998) MR urography in the evaluation of urinary tract obstruction. Abdom Imaging 23:27–34

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bakker J, de Kort GAP, Lo R et al. (2002) MR urography for the preoperative evaluation of living renal donors. Eur Radiol 12:2021–2029

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Louca G, Liberopoulos K, Fidas A, Nikolakopoulou Z, Lykourinas M, Strigaris K (1999) MR urography in the diagnosis of urinary tract obstruction. Eur Urol 35:102–108

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fradin JM, Regan F, Rodriquez R, Moore R (1999) Hydronephrosis in pregnancy: simultaneous depiction of fetal and maternal hydronephrosis by magnetic resonance urography. Urology 53:825–827

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Grenier N, Pariente L, Trillaud H, Soussotte C, Douws C (2000) Dilatation of the collecting system during pregnancy: physiologic vs obstructive dilatation. Eur Radiol 10:271–279

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Borthne A, Pierre-Jerome C, Nordshus T, Reiseter T (2000) MR urography in children: current status and future development. Eur Radiol 10:503–511

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Engine G, Esen T, Rozanes I (2000) MR urography findings of a duplicated ectopic ureter in an adult man. Eur Radiol 10:1253–1256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Maher MM, Prasad TA, Fitzpatrick JM et al. (2000) Spinal dysraphism at MR urography: initial experience. Radiology 216:237–241

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nolte-Ernsting CCA, Adam GB, Gunther RW (2001) MR urography: examination techniques and clinical principles. Eur Radiol 11:335–372

    Google Scholar 

  14. Shipstone DP, Thomas DG, Darwent G, Morcos SK (2002) MR urography in patients with neurogenic bladder dysfunction and spinal dysraphism. Br J Urol 89:658–654

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Sudah M, Vanninen R, Partanen K, Heino A, Vainio P, Ala-Opas M (2001) MR urography in evaluation of acute left flank pain: T2-weighted sequences and gadolinium-enhanced three-dimensional FLASH compared with urography. AJR 76:105–112

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. K. Morcos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Girish, G., Chooi, W.K. & Morcos, S.K. Filling defect artefacts in magnetic resonance urography. Eur Radiol 14, 145–150 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-003-1986-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-003-1986-5

Keywords

Navigation