AJR Get Involved! Join ARRS Today
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
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 Rybicki, F. J.
Right arrow Articles by Silverman, S. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rybicki, F. J.
Right arrow Articles by Silverman, S. G.
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?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?
AJR 2003; 180:1281-1287
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Percutaneous Biopsy of Renal Masses: Sensitivity and Negative Predictive Value Stratified by Clinical Setting and Size of Masses

Frank J. Rybicki1, Kirstin M. Shu1, Edmund S. Cibas2, Julia R. Fielding1,3, Eric vanSonnenberg1 and Stuart G. Silverman1

1 Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis St., Boston, MA 02115.
2 Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115.
3 Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2016 Old Clinic Building, Campus Box 7510, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7510.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our retrospective study was to evaluate the sensitivity and negative predictive value of percutaneous biopsy of renal masses stratified by clinical setting and the size of the mass.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. We categorized 115 consecutive percutaneous biopsies of renal masses in 113 patients into four clinical settings and three groups of mass sizes. The sensitivity and negative predictive value were computed (with 95% confidence intervals [CI]) for each clinical setting and for each size group.

RESULTS. For all procedures (n = 115), the sensitivity and negative predictive value were 90% (95% CI, 81-95%) and 64% (95% CI, 44-81%), respectively. For patients with a known malignancy who presented with a renal mass (n = 55), the sensitivity and negative predictive value were 90% (95% CI, 78-96%) and 38% (95% CI, 10-74%), respectively. For patients with no known malignancy and suspected unresectable tumor (n = 36), the sensitivity and negative predictive value were 92% (95% CI, 76-98%) and 0%, respectively. For patients with no known malignancy who presented with a cystic mass (n = 16), the sensitivity and negative predictive value were 33% (95% CI, 2-87%) and 87% (95% CI, 58-98%), respectively. For patients who were not surgical candidates with a renal cell carcinoma (n = 8) that was thought to be resectable, both the sensitivity and negative predictive value were 100%. For masses 3 cm and less (n = 31), the sensitivity and negative predictive value were 84% (95% CI, 63-95%) and 60% (95% CI, 27-86%), respectively. For masses between 4 and 6 cm (n = 42), the sensitivity and negative predictive value were 97% (95% CI, 83-100%) and 89% (95% CI, 51-99%), respectively. For masses greater than 6 cm (n = 42), the sensitivity and negative predictive value were 87% (95% CI, 71-95%) and 44% (95% CI, 15-77%), respectively.

CONCLUSION. Percutaneous renal mass biopsy has a high sensitivity in three clinical settings: patients with a known malignancy, patients with no known malignancy and suspected unresectable tumor, and nonsurgical patients with a mass suspected to be a resectable renal cell carcinoma. Negative results in small (<= 3 cm) and large (> 6 cm) masses should be viewed with caution.


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
RadiologyHome page
S. G. Silverman, G. M. Israel, B. R. Herts, and J. P. Richie
Management of the Incidental Renal Mass
Radiology, October 1, 2008; 249(1): 16 - 31.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
G. M. Israel and M. A. Bosniak
Pitfalls in Renal Mass Evaluation and How to Avoid Them1
RadioGraphics, September 1, 2008; 28(5): 1325 - 1338.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
S. Signoretti, G. Bratslavsky, F. M. Waldman, V. E. Reuter, J. Haaga, M. Merino, G. V. Thomas, M. R. Pins, T. Libermann, J. Gillespie, et al.
Tissue-Based Research in Kidney Cancer: Current Challenges and Future Directions
Clin. Cancer Res., June 15, 2008; 14(12): 3699 - 3705.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. K. Hatfield, R. A. Beres, S. S. Sane, and G. X. Zaleski
Percutaneous Imaging-Guided Solid Organ Core Needle Biopsy: Coaxial Versus Noncoaxial Method
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2008; 190(2): 413 - 417.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
S. G. Silverman, K. J. Mortele, K. Tuncali, M. Jinzaki, and E. S. Cibas
Hyperattenuating Renal Masses: Etiologies, Pathogenesis, and Imaging Evaluation
RadioGraphics, July 1, 2007; 27(4): 1131 - 1143.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. E. Heilbrun, R. J. Zagoria, A. J. Garvin, M. C. Hall, K. Krehbiel, A. Southwick, and P. E. Clark
CT-Guided Biopsy for the Diagnosis of Renal Tumors Before Treatment with Percutaneous Ablation
Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2007; 188(6): 1500 - 1505.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. D. Beland, W. W. Mayo-Smith, D. E. Dupuy, J. J. Cronan, and R. A. DeLellis
Diagnostic Yield of 58 Consecutive Imaging-Guided Biopsies of Solid Renal Masses: Should We Biopsy All That Are Indeterminate?
Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2007; 188(3): 792 - 797.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
S. G. Silverman, Y. U. Gan, K. J. Mortele, K. Tuncali, and E. S. Cibas
Renal Masses in the Adult Patient: The Role of Percutaneous Biopsy
Radiology, July 1, 2006; 240(1): 6 - 22.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
S. Sheth, S. Ali, and E. Fishman
Imaging of renal lymphoma: patterns of disease with pathologic correlation.
RadioGraphics, July 1, 2006; 26(4): 1151 - 1168.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
G. M. Israel and M. A. Bosniak
How I Do It: Evaluating Renal Masses
Radiology, August 1, 2005; 236(2): 441 - 450.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
K. Tuncali, E. vanSonnenberg, S. Shankar, K. J. Mortele, E. S. Cibas, and S. G. Silverman
Evaluation of Patients Referred for Percutaneous Ablation of Renal Tumors: Importance of a Preprocedural Diagnosis
Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2004; 183(3): 575 - 582.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.