Abstract
Purpose: To determine whether benign exophytic renal masses can be distinguished from malignant lesions by using the angular interface sign in ultrasonography (US) and computerized tomography (CT). Materials and Methods: A total of 71 cases with exophytic renal mass (2 cm or greater) were examined on the basis of angular interface in US (n = 23), CT (n = 21) and US + CT (n = 16) between January 2008 and June 2010 were included in this study. The renal interface relationships were examined by 2 radiologists and classified as having angular or wide interface. Results: No statistically significant difference was found between the findings of two readers. There was almost perfect interobserver agreement for the interface sign. For cystic lesions, the angular interface sign was determined in all but two Bosniak category 1 case. Also, the angular interface sign was positive in all but one Bosniak category 2 - 3. For cystic lesions with solid component and pure solid lesions, in the benign group, the angular interface sign was positive in all except three cases (vascular malformation, oncocytoma and Xanthogranulomatous pyelonephritis). In the malignant group, the angular interface sign was determined in only two RCC cases; in other primary or metastatic malignant lesions there was a wide interface sign. Conclusion: Exophytic renal masses can be differentiated as malignant or benign with 87% accuracy using only the angular interface sign in US or CT and also in opposition to dynamic-contrast examinations. This method entails a lack of additional radiation or contrast media exposure, time-saving, and costeffectivity.
Highlights
Until now, many studies have been conducted using US, computerized tomography (CT) or MRI to evaluate renal masses [1,2,3,4]
To determine whether benign exophytic renal masses can be distinguished from malignant lesions by using the angular interface sign in ultrasonography (US) and computerized tomography (CT)
The angular interface sign was determined in only two RCC cases; in other primary or metastatic malignant lesions there was a wide interface sign
Summary
Many studies have been conducted using US, CT or MRI to evaluate renal masses [1,2,3,4]. In these studies differential diagnosis was attempted with various, complex modalities like contrast enhanced US, dynamic or perfussion CT/MRI, and diffusion MRI. Despite these detailed, difficult and often expensive modalities, the evaluation of renal masses remains a common problem in radiologic practice [4]. The known sensitivity and specificity values, and of time consumption, contrast enhanced modalities for further
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
