Vásquez-Gijón M, Rodríguez-Nava P, Dena-Espinoza E, Morales-Pérez F

Language: Spanish
References: 8
Page: 140-147
PDF size: 425.14 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objetive: describe the main tomographic findings and observe the degree of concordance between multislice computed tomography and histopathological reporting, in staging of renal cell carcinoma; and the implementation of a structured radiological report for its evaluation.
Material and Methods: a transverse and unicentric observational, descriptive study of patients in the urology outpatient service, with presumptive diagnosis of renal tumor under study, referred to the department of computed tomography in the period from March to November 2015. All the patients were initially studied in single phase and then applying intravenous contrast in the cortical, nephrographic, and excretory phases. Statistical analysis of the results was conducted with single frequencies and percentage distribution, the degree of concordance between the two methods was determined by means of the statistical test of the kappa (k) coefficient.
Results: fifty-one patients were included. The most common diagnoses were tumors in 57% of cases. Benign tumors were confirmed in 7 cases (24%), of which the most common was angiomyolipoma; of the malignant tumors, the predominant diagnosis was renal cell carcinoma with 21 cases representing 95%; only 13 patients had histopathological diagnosis, the most common being clear cell carcinoma (84%) followed by chromophobe and papillary (8%). A 95% concordance was found between the two methods in relation to the criterion T of the TNM classification (primitive tumor [T], regional lymphatic compromise [N], and metastasis [M]).
Conclusions: based on the results obtained, we can conclude that multislice computed tomography provides good delimitation and characterization of renal cell carcinoma. The degree of concordance with the most reliable reference pattern (anatomopathological studio) proved near perfect (k =95%) for staging the criterion T. A structured report helps to specifically evaluate the characteristics of the lesion providing greater diagnostic precision.

REFERENCES

1. Fernández M, Zuluaga G, Valle D y cols: Caracterización por la imagen de las masas renales; Actas Urológicas Españolas 2009;33(5):482-498.

2. González J, Castan E, Martínez A y cols: Diagnóstico diferencial de las lesiones renales sólidas en adultos mediante TCMD con correlación anatomopatológica, Sociedad Española de Radiología Medica, 2014/S-0315.

3. Peycelon M, Renard-Penna R, Roupret M y cols: Tumores renales; Elsevier, Traité de Médecine Akos, 2011(5)620.

4. Venkata S, Gangadhar K, Vinu-Nair S y cols: Cystic renal neoplasms in adults: Current imaging update, Applied Radiology, 2015;1:23-37.

5. Jiménez R, Solares S, et al, Cáncer Renal, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología 2011:6:19- 24.

6. Venkata S, Raghunandan V, Arpit M y cols: Mesenchymal Neoplasms of the Kidney in Adults: Imaging Spectrum with Radiologic-Pathologic Correlation; Radiographics 2010,30;1525-1540.

7. Ortega H, Ezquer J, Cenice F y cols: Carcinoma de células renales: estadificación prequirúrgica por tomografía computada y su analogía con la anatomía patológica: Revista Argentina de Radiología 2013,77(1):10-17.

8. Venkata S, Deepak G, Srinivasa R y cols: Cystic Renal Neoplasms and Renal Neoplasms Associated with Cystic Renal Diseases in Adults: Cross-Sectional Imaging Findings; Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, 2012;36:659-668.