Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
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 Choyke, P. L.
Right arrow Articles by Mamourian, A. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Choyke, P. L.
Right arrow Articles by Mamourian, A. C.

Radiology, Vol 152, 471-477, Copyright © 1984 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Focal renal masses: magnetic resonance imaging

PL Choyke, HY Kressel, HM Pollack, PM Arger, L Axel and AC Mamourian

Thirty patients with focal renal masses were evaluated on a .12-Tesla resistive magnetic resonance unit using partial saturation and spin echo pulse sequences. A short repetition time (TR = 143 ms) was employed for partial saturation images and a spin echo was present in each case (TE = 10 ms). Additional pulse sequences through regions of interest were also obtained. Fifteen patients had cystic lesions, nine patients had renal cell carcinoma, two had metastatic lesions, one had an angiomyolipoma, and three had focal bacterial infection. Cystic lesions were well circumscribed and demonstrated a range of signal intensities. Small intra-parenchymal cysts were difficult to identify. Renal cell carcinomas demonstrated areas of increased signal using a partial saturation sequence (TR = 143-415 ms, TE = 10 ms). Magnetic resonance imaging accurately detected perinephric extension and vascular invasion in all patients. Metastatic disease to the kidney was uniformly low in signal, in contrast to primary renal cell carcinoma; an angiomyolipoma demonstrated very high signal intensity. Two masses resulting from acute focal bacterial nephritis were uniformly low in signal. One additional case of a more indolent pyelonephritis demonstrated high signal in regions of replacement lipomatosis and low signal in sites of active infection. Magnetic resonance imaging appears to be an accurate way of detecting, identifying, and staging focal renal masses.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
C. Roy Sr., S. El Ghali, X. Buy, V. Lindner, H. Lang, C. Saussine, and D. Jacqmin
Significance of the Pseudocapsule on MRI of Renal Neoplasms and Its Potential Application for Local Staging: A Retrospective Study
Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2005; 184(1): 113 - 120.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. Scialpi, A. Di Maggio, M. Midiri, A. Loperfido, G. Angelelli, and A. Rotondo
Small Renal Masses: Assessment of Lesion Characterization and Vascularity on Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced MR Imaging with Fat Suppression
Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2000; 175(3): 751 - 757.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1984 by the Radiological Society of North America.