Limits...
Radiologic evaluation of small renal masses (I): pretreatment management.

Marhuenda A, Martín MI, Deltoro C, Santos J, Rubio Briones J - Adv Urol (2009)

Bottom Line: Is this a task for a urologist or a radiologist?It is obvious that in the increasing clinical scenario where this decision has to be made, both specialists ought to work together.Special emphasis has been placed on aspects regarding the bidirectional information between radiologists and urologists needed to achieve the best radiological approach to an SRM.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Departamento de Radiología, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, C/Profesor Beltrán Báguena 8, 46009 Valencia, Spain. amarflu@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
When characterizing a small renal mass (SRM), the main question to be answered is whether the mass represents a surgical or nonsurgical lesion or, in some cases, if followup studies are a reasonable option. Is this a task for a urologist or a radiologist? It is obvious that in the increasing clinical scenario where this decision has to be made, both specialists ought to work together. This paper will focus on the principles, indications, and limitations of ultrasound, CT, and MRI to characterize an SRM in 2008 with a detailed review of relevant literature. Special emphasis has been placed on aspects regarding the bidirectional information between radiologists and urologists needed to achieve the best radiological approach to an SRM.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Angiomyolipoma. Contrast-enhancedCT shows a small homogeneous fat-containing mass.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2662406&req=5

fig6: Angiomyolipoma. Contrast-enhancedCT shows a small homogeneous fat-containing mass.

Mentions: It is typicallya solid lesion that exhibits fat density on CT scans (−10 to –100 HU) (see Figure 6). However, in some cases, it may contain very small quantities of fat thatcan be overlooked. Angiomyolipomas rarely contain calcification, and,therefore, a diagnosis of angiomyolipoma should not be made if a lesioncontains fat and calcium [33, 34]. Therehave been few case reports of fat from RCC that also contain calcification. Insuch cases, a renal cell carcinoma must be considered the most likely diagnosis.


Radiologic evaluation of small renal masses (I): pretreatment management.

Marhuenda A, Martín MI, Deltoro C, Santos J, Rubio Briones J - Adv Urol (2009)

Angiomyolipoma. Contrast-enhancedCT shows a small homogeneous fat-containing mass.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2662406&req=5

fig6: Angiomyolipoma. Contrast-enhancedCT shows a small homogeneous fat-containing mass.
Mentions: It is typicallya solid lesion that exhibits fat density on CT scans (−10 to –100 HU) (see Figure 6). However, in some cases, it may contain very small quantities of fat thatcan be overlooked. Angiomyolipomas rarely contain calcification, and,therefore, a diagnosis of angiomyolipoma should not be made if a lesioncontains fat and calcium [33, 34]. Therehave been few case reports of fat from RCC that also contain calcification. Insuch cases, a renal cell carcinoma must be considered the most likely diagnosis.

Bottom Line: Is this a task for a urologist or a radiologist?It is obvious that in the increasing clinical scenario where this decision has to be made, both specialists ought to work together.Special emphasis has been placed on aspects regarding the bidirectional information between radiologists and urologists needed to achieve the best radiological approach to an SRM.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Departamento de Radiología, Instituto Valenciano de Oncología, C/Profesor Beltrán Báguena 8, 46009 Valencia, Spain. amarflu@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
When characterizing a small renal mass (SRM), the main question to be answered is whether the mass represents a surgical or nonsurgical lesion or, in some cases, if followup studies are a reasonable option. Is this a task for a urologist or a radiologist? It is obvious that in the increasing clinical scenario where this decision has to be made, both specialists ought to work together. This paper will focus on the principles, indications, and limitations of ultrasound, CT, and MRI to characterize an SRM in 2008 with a detailed review of relevant literature. Special emphasis has been placed on aspects regarding the bidirectional information between radiologists and urologists needed to achieve the best radiological approach to an SRM.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus