Vol. 6 (04) pp. 980-985 DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/6938

DIFFERENTIATION OF RENAL AML (ANGIOMYOLIPOMA) WITH MINIMAL FAT FROM RCC (RENAL CELL CARCINOMA) BY ANALYSIS ON CT IMAGES.

, , , and
  • Center of Interventional Radiology and Vascular Surgery, Department of Radiology, ZhongDa Hospital.
18 Downloads 141 Views
Crossref

Download Full Paper (PDF)

How to Cite This Article

Munezero Champion, Prof Deng Gang, Dipsundar Limbu, Suman Rouniyar and Kwizera Ghyslaine. (2018); DIFFERENTIATION OF RENAL AML (ANGIOMYOLIPOMA) WITH MINIMAL FAT FROM RCC (RENAL CELL CARCINOMA) BY ANALYSIS ON CT IMAGES., International Journal of Advanced Research (IJAR), 6 (04), 980-985, ISSN 2320-5407. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/6938

Corresponding Author

Munezero Champion
ZhongDa hospital, Southeast University, Nanjing, China

Article Analytics

References

  1. Bosniak, M.A., et al., CT diagnosis of renal angiomyolipoma: the importance of detecting small amounts of fat. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1988. 151(3): p. 497-501.
  2. Jinzaki, M., et al., Angiomyolipoma: imaging findings in lesions with minimal fat. Radiology, 1997. 205(2): p. 497-502.
  3. Yang, C.W., et al., Are there useful CT features to differentiate renal cell carcinoma from lipid-poor renal angiomyolipoma? AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2013. 201(5): p. 1017-28.
  4. Lane, B.R., et al., Clinical Correlates of Renal Angiomyolipoma Subtypes in 209 Patients: Classic, Fat Poor, Tuberous Sclerosis Associated and Epithelioid. The Journal of Urology, 2008. 180(3): p. 836-843.
  5. Chen, C.-L., et al., Calcified, minimally Fat-contained angiomyolipoma clinically indistinguishable from a renal cell carcinoma. BMC Nephrology, 2013. 14(1): p. 160.
  6. Kim, J.K., et al., Differentiation of subtypes of renal cell carcinoma on helical CT scans. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2002. 178(6): p. 1499-506.
  7. Schuster, T.G., et al., Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma Containing Fat Without Calcification Mimicking Angiomyolipoma on CT. American Journal of Roentgenology, 2004. 183(5): p. 1402-1404.
  8. Ohkawa, M., M. Kadoya, and A. Nonomura, Renal angiomyolipoma composed primarily of smooth muscle element: diagnostic considerations. Urol Int, 1995. 54(4): p. 230-3.
  9. Jinzaki, M., et al., Double-phase helical CT of small renal parenchymal neoplasms: correlation with pathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2000. 24(6): p. 835-42.
  10. Hafron, J., et al., Imaging characteristics of minimal fat renal angiomyolipoma with histologic correlations. Urology, 2005. 66(6): p. 1155-9.
  11. Kim, J.K., et al., Angiomyolipoma with minimal fat: differentiation from renal cell carcinoma at biphasic helical CT. Radiology, 2004. 230(3): p. 677-84.
  12. Kim, J.Y., et al., CT histogram analysis: differentiation of angiomyolipoma without visible fat from renal cell carcinoma at CT imaging. Radiology, 2008. 246(2): p. 472-9.
  13. Fine, S.W., et al., Angiomyolipoma with epithelial cysts (AMLEC): a distinct cystic variant of angiomyolipoma. Am J Surg Pathol, 2006. 30(5): p. 593-9.
  14. Eble, J.N., M.B. Amin, and R.H. Young, Epithelioid angiomyolipoma of the kidney: a report of five cases with a prominent and diagnostically confusing epithelioid smooth muscle component. Am J Surg Pathol, 1997. 21(10): p. 1123-30.
  15. Park, H.K., et al., Clinical presentation of epithelioid angiomyolipoma. Int J Urol, 2007. 14(1): p. 21-5.
  16. Warakaulle, D.R., et al., Malignant monotypic epithelioid angiomyolipoma of the kidney. Clin Radiol, 2004. 59(9): p. 849-52.
  17. Eble, J.N., World Health Organization classification of tumors: Pathology and Genetics of Tumors of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs. IARC press, 2004.
  18. Bharwani, N., et al., Epithelioid angiomyolipoma: imaging appearances. Br J Radiol, 2009. 82(984): p. e249-52.
  19. Tsukada, J., et al., Epithelioid angiomyolipoma of the kidney: radiological imaging. Int J Urol, 2013. 20(11): p. 1105-11.
  20. Wolff, N., et al., Sirolimus and temsirolimus for epithelioid angiomyolipoma. J Clin Oncol, 2010. 28(5): p. e65-8.
  21. Shitara, K., et al., Dramatic tumor response to everolimus for malignant epithelioid angiomyolipoma. Jpn J Clin Oncol, 2011. 41(6): p. 814-6.
  22. Hosokawa, Y., et al., Renal angiomyolipoma with minimal fat. Int J Clin Oncol, 2002. 7(2): p. 120-3.
  23. Lemaitre, L., et al., Imaging of angiomyolipomas. Semin Ultrasound CT MR, 1997. 18(2): p. 100-14.
  24. Yamakado, K., et al., Renal angiomyolipoma: relationships between tumor size, aneurysm formation, and rupture. Radiology, 2002. 225(1): p. 78-82.
  25. Schieda, N., M.D.F. McInnes, and L. Cao, Diagnostic accuracy of segmental enhancement inversion for diagnosis of renal oncocytoma at biphasic contrast enhanced CT: systematic review. European Radiology, 2014. 24(6): p. 1421-1429.
  26. Silverman, S.G., et al., Small (< or = 3 cm) hyperechoic renal masses: comparison of helical and convention CT for diagnosing angiomyolipoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1996. 167(4): p. 877-81.
  27. Simpson, E. and U. Patel, Diagnosis of angiomyolipoma using computed tomography-region of interest < or =-10 HU or 4 adjacent pixels < or =-10 HU are recommended as the diagnostic thresholds. Clin Radiol, 2006. 61(5): p. 410-6.
  28. Patel, U., et al., Tuberose sclerosis complex: analysis of growth rates aids differentiation of renal cell carcinoma from atypical or minimal-fat-containing angiomyolipoma. Clinical Radiology, 2005. 60(6): p. 665-673.
  29. Sasiwimonphan, K., et al., Small (<4 cm) renal mass: differentiation of angiomyolipoma without visible fat from renal cell carcinoma utilizing MR imaging. Radiology, 2012. 263(1): p. 160-8.
  30. Ishigami, K., et al., Characterization of renal cell carcinoma, oncocytoma, and lipid-poor angiomyolipoma by unenhanced, nephrographic, and delayed phase contrast-enhanced computed tomography. Clin Imaging, 2015. 39(1): p. 76-84.
  31. Kim, M.H., et al., MDCT-based scoring system for differentiating angiomyolipoma with minimal fat from renal cell carcinoma. Acta Radiol, 2013. 54(10): p. 1201-9.
  32. M Murphy, A., et al., Increasing Detection Rate of Benign Renal Tumors: Evaluation of Factors Predicting for Benign Tumor Histologic Features During Past Two Decades. Vol. 73. 2009. 1293-7.
  33. Snyder, M.E., et al., Incidence of benign lesions for clinically localized renal masses smaller than 7 cm in radiological diameter: influence of sex. J Urol, 2006. 176(6 Pt 1): p. 2391-5; discussion 2395-6.
  34. Pahernik, S., et al., Small renal tumors: correlation of clinical and pathological features with tumor size. J Urol, 2007. 178(2): p. 414-7; discussion 416-7.
  35. Kim, Y.H., et al., Morphologic analysis with computed tomography may help differentiate fat-poor angiomyolipoma from renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective study with 602 patients. Abdominal Radiology, 2018. 43(3): p. 647-654.
  36. L Danforth, T., B. R Lane, and A. C Novick, Conservative management of giant symptomatic angiomyolipomas in patients with the tuberous sclerosis complex. Vol. 100. 2007. 794-7.
  37. Dickinson, M., et al., Renal angiomyolipoma: Optimal treatment based on size and symptoms. Vol. 49. 1998. 281-6.
  38. Oesterling, J.E., et al., The management of renal angiomyolipoma. J Urol, 1986. 135(6): p. 1121-4.
  39. Rimon, U., et al., Large renal angiomyolipomas: digital subtraction angiographic grading and presentation with bleeding. Clin Radiol, 2006. 61(6): p. 520-6.
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.