Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Small renal cell carcinomas: Resolving a diagnostic dilemma

  • M. A. Amendola
  • , R. L. Bree
  • , H. M. Pollack
  • , I. R. Francis
  • , G. M. Glazer
  • , S. Z.H. Jafri
  • , J. E. Tomaszewski
  • University of Pennsylvania

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

131 Scopus citations

Abstract

Thirty-nine patients with pathologically proved renal cell carcinomas 3 cm or less in diameter were examined. Results of intravenous urography (n = 30) were true positive in 20 patients and false negative in ten (sensitivity, 67%). Renal ultrasound (US) (n = 29) had true-positive results in 23 patients and false-negative results in six (sensitivity, 79%); computed tomography (CT) (n = 36) had true-positive results in 34 and false-negative results in two (sensitivity, 94%). For selective renal angiography (n = 35), the results were true positive in 26 and false negative in nine (sensitivity, 74%), with typical hypervascular renal cell carcinomas demonstrated in 17. Finally, the findings of percutaneous fine-needle aspiration biopsy were true positive in one of five patients when US guidance was used (sensitivity, 20%) and in five of eight when CT guidance was used (sensitivity, 62%). Small renal cell carcinomas are more frequently encountered in clinical practice than heretofore realized, and they are best imaged by CT.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)637-641
Number of pages5
JournalRadiology
Volume166
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1988

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Small renal cell carcinomas: Resolving a diagnostic dilemma'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this