We have located links that may give you full text access.
New radiologic classification of renal angiomyolipomas.
European Journal of Radiology 2016 October
PURPOSE: To introduce a new radiologic classification of renal angiomyolipoma (AML).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1995 and 2014, CT or MR images in 98 patients with histologically proven 98 AMLs were reviewed independently by a radiologist and a resident. The lesions were classified as (a) 53 fat-rich AML (≤-10HU), (b) 22 fat-poor AML (>-10HU) with tumor-to-spleen ratio (TSR) <0.71 or signal intensity index (SII) >16.5%, and (c) 23 fat-invisible AML (>-10HU) with TSR ≥0.71 and SII ≤16.5%. Inter-reader agreement was assessed with a weighted kappa value. Fat-poor and fat-invisible AMLs were compared in terms of attenuation value, TSR, and SII using unpaired t-test.
RESULTS: The weighted kappa value was 0.956 (95% confidence interval, 92.0-99.1%). When a region of interest (ROI) was placed within the most hypodense area on unenhanced CT or within the most signal-dropped area on chemical shift image, the mean attenuation values, TSRs, and SIIs of fat-poor versus fat-invisible AMLs were 19.5±8.1 HU versus 38.1±9.9 HU, 0.59±0.19 versus 0.96±0.01, and 43.7±16.9% versus -5.4±21.1%, respectively (p<0.0001). When a ROI was placed within the other area on CT or chemical shift images, 90.1% (48/53) of fat-rich AMLs were mis-classified as fat-poor or fat-invisible AML and 50% (11/22) of fat-poor AMLs as fat-invisible AML.
CONCLUSION: The new radiologic classification of renal AML is feasible for clinical practice. ROI location is important in differentiating the types of AMLs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1995 and 2014, CT or MR images in 98 patients with histologically proven 98 AMLs were reviewed independently by a radiologist and a resident. The lesions were classified as (a) 53 fat-rich AML (≤-10HU), (b) 22 fat-poor AML (>-10HU) with tumor-to-spleen ratio (TSR) <0.71 or signal intensity index (SII) >16.5%, and (c) 23 fat-invisible AML (>-10HU) with TSR ≥0.71 and SII ≤16.5%. Inter-reader agreement was assessed with a weighted kappa value. Fat-poor and fat-invisible AMLs were compared in terms of attenuation value, TSR, and SII using unpaired t-test.
RESULTS: The weighted kappa value was 0.956 (95% confidence interval, 92.0-99.1%). When a region of interest (ROI) was placed within the most hypodense area on unenhanced CT or within the most signal-dropped area on chemical shift image, the mean attenuation values, TSRs, and SIIs of fat-poor versus fat-invisible AMLs were 19.5±8.1 HU versus 38.1±9.9 HU, 0.59±0.19 versus 0.96±0.01, and 43.7±16.9% versus -5.4±21.1%, respectively (p<0.0001). When a ROI was placed within the other area on CT or chemical shift images, 90.1% (48/53) of fat-rich AMLs were mis-classified as fat-poor or fat-invisible AML and 50% (11/22) of fat-poor AMLs as fat-invisible AML.
CONCLUSION: The new radiologic classification of renal AML is feasible for clinical practice. ROI location is important in differentiating the types of AMLs.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app