AJR Your Link to CME
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by BUIST, T. A. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by BUIST, T. A. S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

PARASITIC ARTERIAL SUPPLY TO INTRACAPSULAR RENAL CELL CARCINOMA

T. A. S. BUIST M.B., F.F.R.

A prospective angiographic study of parasitic arterial supply in unselected cases of renal cell carcinoma was correlated, following nephrectomy, with pathologic evidence of transcapsular tumor spread. Parasitic arterial supply was shown in 9 of the 10 cases in which transcapsular tumor extension had occurred, but it was also demonstrated in 7 of the 11 cases in which tumor was entirely confined within the renal capsule. Selective angiographic study of parasitic supply was not found to be a reliable method for the recognition of early transcapsular tumor extension.

The common sources of parasitic supply to renal tumors derive from the perirenal arterial network, which communicates with the intrarenal circulation through capsular perforating branches. Less commonly it is obtained from intestinal vessels when these structures are in close relationship. Profuse panasitic supply from inferior mesenteric arterial branches is reported in a case where the renal carcinoma was entirely confined within the renal capsule.

It is concluded that identification of parasitic arterial supply to renalcarcinomas should not, in itself, be regarded as evidence of extrarenal extension of tumor or inoperability.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1974 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.