AJR Join ARRS
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
Right arrow Citation Map
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 Silverman, S. G.
Right arrow Articles by Judy, P. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Silverman, S. G.
Right arrow Articles by Judy, P. F.
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 167, 877-881, Copyright © 1996 by American Roentgen Ray Society


ARTICLES

Small (< or = 3 cm) hyperechoic renal masses: comparison of helical and convention CT for diagnosing angiomyolipoma

SG Silverman, GD Pearson, SE Seltzer, M Polger, CM Tempany, DF Adams, DL Brown and PF Judy
Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

OBJECTIVE: Because hyperechoic renal masses may represent angiomyolipomas or small renal cancers, CT is often used to reveal the fatty component, which allows diagnosis of angiomyolipoma in most cases. Because conventional CT can fail to reveal fat in angiomyolipomas 3 cm or smaller, we conducted a study to determine whether helical CT would improve our detection of fat and allow more of these masses to be diagnosed as angiomyolipomas. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We used helical and conventional CT to examine 20 masses (5-29 mm in diameter) in 17 patients who had a small hyperechoic mass detected sonographically. Densitometry was performed by three readers and the mean attenuation values were compared. RESULTS: Of the 20 masses, we diagnosed angiomyolipoma in 16 masses using helical CT and in 14 masses using conventional CT. In 11 masses, we found the measured attenuation values to be more negative on helical CT scans than on conventional CT scans. In five masses, we found the opposite to be true. In the remaining four masses, we were unable to diagnose angiomyolipoma. Of the masses that we diagnosed as angiomyolipoma, the mean attenuation value when examined with helical CT (-44 H) was more negative than with conventional CT (-35 H) but not significantly so (p = .058). However, in the subset of patients with masses that were 2 cm or less in diameter (n = 14), the mean attenuation values on helical CT were significantly lower than on conventional CT (-40 H versus -30 H, p < .05). Likewise, for masses with attenuation values that differed by more than 6 H (n = 8), when imaged by the two techniques we again found that mean attenuation values on helical CT were significantly lower (- 43 H versus -24 H, p < .05). CONCLUSION: Helical CT revealed angiomyolipoma across all cases as well as conventional CT did. Also, helical CT was more sensitive in revealing fat in masses less than 2 cm in diameter and in masses in which the attenuations of the two CT techniques differed by a significant amount. We preferred helical CT over conventional CT when examining hyperechoic masses for the purpose of diagnosing angiomyolipoma.
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
M. Jinzaki, J. D. McTavish, K. H. Zou, P. F. Judy, and S. G. Silverman
Evaluation of Small (<= 3 cm) Renal Masses with MDCT: Benefits of Thin Overlapping Reconstructions
Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2004; 183(1): 223 - 228.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
R. D. Nawfel, P. F. Judy, A. R. Schleipman, and S. G. Silverman
Patient Radiation Dose at CT Urography and Conventional Urography
Radiology, July 1, 2004; 232(1): 126 - 132.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
J. K. Kim, S.-Y. Park, J.-H. Shon, and K.-S. Cho
Angiomyolipoma with Minimal Fat: Differentiation from Renal Cell Carcinoma at Biphasic Helical CT
Radiology, March 1, 2004; 230(3): 677 - 684.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
J. D. McTavish, M. Jinzaki, K. H. Zou, R. D. Nawfel, and S. G. Silverman
Multi-Detector Row CT Urography: Comparison of Strategies for Depicting the Normal Urinary Collecting System
Radiology, December 1, 2002; 225(3): 783 - 790.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
E. Lechevallier, M. André, D. Barriol, L. Daniel, C. Eghazarian, M. De Fromont, D. Rossi, and C. Coulange
Fine-Needle Percutaneous Biopsy of Renal Masses with Helical CT Guidance
Radiology, August 1, 2000; 216(2): 506 - 510.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. E. O'Malley, E. Halpern, P. R. Mueller, and G. S. Gazelle
Helical CT Protocols for the Abdomen and Pelvis: A Survey
Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2000; 175(1): 109 - 113.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
N. A. Avila, J. A. Kelly, S. C. Chu, A. J. Dwyer, and J. Moss
Lymphangioleiomyomatosis: Abdominopelvic CT and US Findings
Radiology, July 1, 2000; 216(1): 147 - 153.
[Abstract] [Full Text]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1996 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.