AJR ARRS Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
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 Similar articles in PubMed
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Platt, J.
Right arrow Articles by Marn, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Platt, J.
Right arrow Articles by Marn, C.
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?
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 151, Issue 2, 317-319
Copyright © 1988 by American Roentgen Ray Society


Articles

The inability to detect kidney disease on the basis of echogenicity

JF Platt, JM Rubin, RA Bowerman, and CS Marn

Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Hospitals, Ann Arbor 48109-0030.

With the use of new sonographic technology, we have observed that the echogenicity of kidneys is often equal to that of the liver in patients in whom there is no evidence of renal disease; this observation conflicts with the generally accepted notion that a normal kidney is always less echogenic than the liver. In order to reassess renal echogenicity as an indicator of disease, three experienced radiologists blindly reviewed the sonograms of the right kidney and liver in 153 patients. The prevalence of renal disease was 26% (40/153). Accepted sonographic criteria for abnormal renal echogenicity (kidney echogenicity greater than or equal to liver) were neither sensitive (62%) nor specific (58%) for renal disease, with a positive predictive value of 35%. Most of these inaccuracies occurred because 43 (72%) of 60 patients in whom renal echogenicity was equal to that of liver had normal renal function. If stricter criteria for abnormality were adopted (kidney echogenicity greater than liver), specificity (96%) and positive predictive value (67%) rose; however, sensitivity was only 20%. We conclude that renal echogenicity equal to the echogenicity of liver is not a good indicator of disease. Use of stricter criteria (kidney echogenicity greater than liver) provides a specific but insensitive test.
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?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
F. Wiersma, B. R. Toorenvliet, M. Ruige, and H. C. Holscher
Increased Echogenicity of Renal Cortex: A Transient Feature in Acutely Ill Children
Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2008; 190(1): 240 - 243.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ImagingHome page
C C Geddes and G M Baxter
Renal impairment
Imaging, January 1, 2005; 17(1): 1 - 18.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Ultrasound MedHome page
M. G. Atta, J. C. Longenecker, D. M. Fine, N. Nagajothi, D. S. Grover, J. Wu, L. C. Racusen, P. J. Scheel Jr, and U. M. Hamper
Sonography as a Predictor of Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Associated Nephropathy
J. Ultrasound Med., May 1, 2004; 23(5): 603 - 610.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1988 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.