IMAGING FEATURES OF SOLID RENAL MASSES: IMPLICATION FOR OPTIMAL TREATMENT

Wimol Insuan,M. Muttarak,P. Mahanupab
Abstract:Objective To describe the imaging features of solid renal masses that possibly differentiate benign from malignant tumors. Materials and methods We retrospectively analyzed CT images of 27 patients with solid renal masses from January 2002 to June 2005. Twenty patients were proven by surgery, three by laboratory results, and four by follow-up study. Each mass was evaluated by its largest diameter, presence of fat, calcifications, perinephric invasion, and hetero- or homogeneity. Associated thrombus in the inferior vena cava, retroperitoneal node enlargement, and renal stone were also recorded. Results: Thirteen patients had malignant tumors and fourteen had benign lesions. Of the 13 malignant tumors, 10 were renal cell carcinoma and three urothelial carcinoma. There were 15 benign lesions in the 14 patients (angimyolipoma = 10, abscesses = 4, organized thrombus =1). The mean age of patients with malignant and benign tumors was 53.8 and 45.2 years, respectively (p = 0.063). The mean diameter of malignant and benign tumors was 9.6 cm and 7.7 cm (p = 0.2), respectively. None of the malignant tumors had fat density and 10 of the benign tumors had intratumoral fat (p<0.05). Six malignant tumors and one benign one had intratumoral calcifications (p<0.05). All malignant tumors were treated by nephrectomy, whereas only 1 organized thrombus and 1 angiomyolipoma underwent nephrectomy. Conclusion The most common solid renal masses in our study were benign lesions. Tumor size was not helpful in differentiating between benign and malignant masses, but the presence of intratumoral fat and calcifications were the most reliable imaging features for this purpose. Hence, the proper management can be provided. Chiang Mai Med Bull 2006;45:(3):105-112.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?