Clinical Radiology
Volume 65, Issue 3 , Pages 185-192, March 2010

MR urography versus retrograde pyelography/ureteroscopy for the exclusion of upper urinary tract malignancy

  • K.S. Lee

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationGuarantor and correspondent: Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Ave. Boston, MA 02215, USA. Tel.: +1 617 754 2506; fax: +1 617 754 2205.
    • ,
  • E. Zeikus

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
    • ,
  • W.C. DeWolf

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Division of Urology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
    • ,
  • N.M. Rofsky

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
    • ,
  • I. Pedrosa

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA

Received 9 September 2009; received in revised form 14 October 2009; accepted 4 November 2009.

Aim

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance urography (MRU) versus retrograde pyelography and/or ureteroscopy (RPU) in the detection of upper urinary tract neoplasms.

Materials and methods

This retrospective study included 35 patients with suspected upper urinary tract malignancy who underwent MRU and RPU within 6-months in our institution during the study period (February 2002 to January 2007). MRU and RPU reports were reviewed and results recorded. For each patient, the urinary tract was sub-divided into four regions for analysis: left kidney/renal pelvis, left ureter, right kidney/renal pelvis, and right ureter. MRU and RPU results for each patient were compared to a reference standard and the diagnostic performance of both techniques was compared.

Results

A total of 113 regions were analysed on MRU and 90 regions on RPU. Nineteen neoplasms were identified. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for the detection of urinary tract neoplasms were 63, 91, 60, and 92% for MRU, respectively, and 53, 97, 83, and 88% for RPU, respectively. These differences were not statistically significant (p>0.05).

Conclusion

The high negative predictive value of MRU in the present series supports its use as a non-invasive screening examination for excluding the presence of upper urinary tract malignancy.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0009-9260(09)00389-4

doi:10.1016/j.crad.2009.11.003

Clinical Radiology
Volume 65, Issue 3 , Pages 185-192, March 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution