Catalogo Articoli (Spogli Riviste)

OPAC HELP

Titolo:
Comparison of nephrographic with excretory phase helical computed tomography for detecting and characterizing renal masses
Autore:
Yuh, BI; Cohan, RH; Francis, IR; Korobkin, M; Ellis, JH;
Indirizzi:
Univ Michigan, Dept Radiol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA Univ Michigan Ann Arbor MI USA 48109 Dept Radiol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
Titolo Testata:
CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF RADIOLOGISTS JOURNAL-JOURNAL DE L ASSOCIATION CANADIENNE DES RADIOLOGISTES
fascicolo: 3, volume: 51, anno: 2000,
pagine: 170 - 176
SICI:
0846-5371(200006)51:3<170:CONWEP>2.0.ZU;2-X
Fonte:
ISI
Lingua:
ENG
Soggetto:
CT; CORTICOMEDULLARY; KIDNEY;
Keywords:
contrast media; diagnosis, differential; kidney neoplasms; observer variation; tomography, x-ray computed;
Tipo documento:
Article
Natura:
Periodico
Settore Disciplinare:
Clinical Medicine
Citazioni:
10
Recensione:
Indirizzi per estratti:
Indirizzo: Cohan, RH Univ Michigan, Dept Radiol, 1500 E Med Ctr Dr, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA Univ Michigan 1500 E Med Ctr Dr Ann Arbor MI USA 48109 48109 USA
Citazione:
B.I. Yuh et al., "Comparison of nephrographic with excretory phase helical computed tomography for detecting and characterizing renal masses", CAN ASSOC R, 51(3), 2000, pp. 170-176

Abstract

Objective: A retrospective study was performed to compare nephrogaphic phase (NP) with excretory phase (EP) renal belied computed tomographic (CT) images with respect to detection of renal masses 10 mm or more in diameter, and reviewer confidence in mass characterization. Methods: Two reviewers evaluated 39 rend helical CT examinations. All masses measuring 10 mm or more in maximal diameter were classified as simple cysts, complex cysts, solid lesions, or indeterminate lesions. Reviewers graded their confidence in the characterization of the masses and decided whether the NP or EP contrast-enhanced images were superior. Results: The 2 reviewers confidently characterized 71 (reviewer 1) and 65 (reviewer 2) of 72 detected masses 10 mm or more in diameter on NP images and 70 (reviewer 1) and 67 (reviewer 2) of 71 detected masses on EP images. There was strong agreement between the 2 sets of images in respect to the characterization of renal masses (kappa = 1.00 and 0.86). Only one mass (a focus of acute pyelonephritis) was not detected by either reviewer on EP images. Collecting system artifact degraded the quality of the EP image in images from only 1 patient. Conclusion: Although EP images are often aesthetically inferior to NP images, use of EP images results in a similar rate of detection and confidence in characterization of renal masses measuring 10 mm or more in diameter.

ASDD Area Sistemi Dipartimentali e Documentali, Università di Bologna, Catalogo delle riviste ed altri periodici
Documento generato il 16/07/20 alle ore 19:59:24