Renal transplant failure due to urologic complications: Comparison of static fluid with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance urography
Abstract Purpose Postrenal reasons of renal transplant failure can be assessed by magnetic resonance urography. This study was designed to retrospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy of static fluid (T2-)MRU compared to contrast enhanced (CE-)MRU in patients with renal transplant failure. Materi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of radiology 2009-02, Vol.69 (2), p.324-330 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 330 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 324 |
container_title | European journal of radiology |
container_volume | 69 |
creator | Blondin, D Koester, A Andersen, K Kurz, K.D Moedder, U Cohnen, M |
description | Abstract Purpose Postrenal reasons of renal transplant failure can be assessed by magnetic resonance urography. This study was designed to retrospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy of static fluid (T2-)MRU compared to contrast enhanced (CE-)MRU in patients with renal transplant failure. Material and methods Thirty-five consecutive patients (14 female, 21 men; mean age 48.6 years) with renal transplant failure and sonographically detected hydronephrosis were examined both with T2-MRU as well as CE-MRU resulting in 39 MRU examinations. MRU was performed both using T2-weighted HASTE-sequence (T2-MRU) as well as Gadolinium-enhanced 3D-FLASH-sequence (CE-MRU) on a 1.5-T clinical MRI scanner (Magnetom Vision, Siemens Medical Solutions). Subjective image quality of resulting maximum intensity projection was assessed in consensus by two readers blinded to the final diagnosis, using a five point scale. MRU findings were correlated to sonography, operative results or clinical follow up. Results CE-MRU yielded a sensitivity of 85.7% (T2-MRU 76.2%), and a specificity of 83.3% (T2-MRU: 73.7%), however statistical significance was not reached. The subjective image quality was significantly better in CE-MRU. Conclusions Only concerning subjective image quality CE-MRU proved superior to T2-MRU. Yet, there was no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between T2- and CE-MRU. Thinking of incipient nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, T2-MRU can be used as reliable alternative in patients with decreased renal transplant function due to urological complications. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.10.026 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66918128</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0720048X07005438</els_id><sourcerecordid>66918128</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-9cddba4d7bee94d68e02742467e3a5211e7ef56674c21db3207123fc920cc2c53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFksuqFDEQhoMonvHoEwiSje56TNKXdAsKMniDA4IXcBcySfVM2nTSJmllXsDnNnEGBTeuQorv_6n6qxB6SMmWEto9nbYwBam3jBCeK1vCultoQ3vOKs4Zv402hDNSkab_coXuxTgRQtpmYHfRFe1J29KWbdDPD-CkxSlIFxcrXcKjNHYNgPUKOHm8Bm_9wSis_LxYo2Qy3sVneJe_MpjoHfYjjinXFR7tajT-YdIx4y6bxlSBO0qnQONZHhwUKkBWlVoxPwS5HE_30Z1R2ggPLu81-vz61afd2-rm_Zt3u5c3lWoalqpBab2XjeZ7gKHRXQ-E8YY1HYdatoxS4DC2Xccbxaje14xwyupRDYwoxVRbX6MnZ98l-G8rxCRmExXYPDn4NYquG2hPWZ_B-gyq4GMMMIolmFmGk6BElPjFJH7HL0r8pZjjz6pHF_t1P4P-q7nknYHHF0BGJe2YY1cm_uHyBJxTXvp8fuYgh_HdQBBRGSgxmgAqCe3Nfxp58Y9eWePy9uxXOEGc_Bry2qOgIjJBxMdyKeVQCC83Uvf1L-f5vF8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>66918128</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Renal transplant failure due to urologic complications: Comparison of static fluid with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance urography</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Blondin, D ; Koester, A ; Andersen, K ; Kurz, K.D ; Moedder, U ; Cohnen, M</creator><creatorcontrib>Blondin, D ; Koester, A ; Andersen, K ; Kurz, K.D ; Moedder, U ; Cohnen, M</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Purpose Postrenal reasons of renal transplant failure can be assessed by magnetic resonance urography. This study was designed to retrospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy of static fluid (T2-)MRU compared to contrast enhanced (CE-)MRU in patients with renal transplant failure. Material and methods Thirty-five consecutive patients (14 female, 21 men; mean age 48.6 years) with renal transplant failure and sonographically detected hydronephrosis were examined both with T2-MRU as well as CE-MRU resulting in 39 MRU examinations. MRU was performed both using T2-weighted HASTE-sequence (T2-MRU) as well as Gadolinium-enhanced 3D-FLASH-sequence (CE-MRU) on a 1.5-T clinical MRI scanner (Magnetom Vision, Siemens Medical Solutions). Subjective image quality of resulting maximum intensity projection was assessed in consensus by two readers blinded to the final diagnosis, using a five point scale. MRU findings were correlated to sonography, operative results or clinical follow up. Results CE-MRU yielded a sensitivity of 85.7% (T2-MRU 76.2%), and a specificity of 83.3% (T2-MRU: 73.7%), however statistical significance was not reached. The subjective image quality was significantly better in CE-MRU. Conclusions Only concerning subjective image quality CE-MRU proved superior to T2-MRU. Yet, there was no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between T2- and CE-MRU. Thinking of incipient nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, T2-MRU can be used as reliable alternative in patients with decreased renal transplant function due to urological complications.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0720-048X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-7727</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.10.026</identifier><identifier>PMID: 18055152</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EJRADR</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier Ireland Ltd</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Contrast Media ; Contrast-enhanced MRU ; Female ; Gadolinium DTPA ; Humans ; Hydronephrosis - diagnosis ; Hydronephrosis - etiology ; Image Enhancement - methods ; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) ; Kidney Transplantation - adverse effects ; Kidney Transplantation - pathology ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases ; Nephropathies. Renovascular diseases. Renal failure ; Radiodiagnosis. Nmr imagery. Nmr spectrometry ; Radiology ; Renal failure ; Renal transplant ; Static fluid MRU ; Transplant failure ; Urinary system ; Urography - methods</subject><ispartof>European journal of radiology, 2009-02, Vol.69 (2), p.324-330</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</rights><rights>2007 Elsevier Ireland Ltd</rights><rights>2009 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-9cddba4d7bee94d68e02742467e3a5211e7ef56674c21db3207123fc920cc2c53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-9cddba4d7bee94d68e02742467e3a5211e7ef56674c21db3207123fc920cc2c53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.10.026$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=21177175$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18055152$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Blondin, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koester, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Andersen, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kurz, K.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moedder, U</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cohnen, M</creatorcontrib><title>Renal transplant failure due to urologic complications: Comparison of static fluid with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance urography</title><title>European journal of radiology</title><addtitle>Eur J Radiol</addtitle><description>Abstract Purpose Postrenal reasons of renal transplant failure can be assessed by magnetic resonance urography. This study was designed to retrospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy of static fluid (T2-)MRU compared to contrast enhanced (CE-)MRU in patients with renal transplant failure. Material and methods Thirty-five consecutive patients (14 female, 21 men; mean age 48.6 years) with renal transplant failure and sonographically detected hydronephrosis were examined both with T2-MRU as well as CE-MRU resulting in 39 MRU examinations. MRU was performed both using T2-weighted HASTE-sequence (T2-MRU) as well as Gadolinium-enhanced 3D-FLASH-sequence (CE-MRU) on a 1.5-T clinical MRI scanner (Magnetom Vision, Siemens Medical Solutions). Subjective image quality of resulting maximum intensity projection was assessed in consensus by two readers blinded to the final diagnosis, using a five point scale. MRU findings were correlated to sonography, operative results or clinical follow up. Results CE-MRU yielded a sensitivity of 85.7% (T2-MRU 76.2%), and a specificity of 83.3% (T2-MRU: 73.7%), however statistical significance was not reached. The subjective image quality was significantly better in CE-MRU. Conclusions Only concerning subjective image quality CE-MRU proved superior to T2-MRU. Yet, there was no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between T2- and CE-MRU. Thinking of incipient nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, T2-MRU can be used as reliable alternative in patients with decreased renal transplant function due to urological complications.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Contrast Media</subject><subject>Contrast-enhanced MRU</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gadolinium DTPA</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hydronephrosis - diagnosis</subject><subject>Hydronephrosis - etiology</subject><subject>Image Enhancement - methods</subject><subject>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</subject><subject>Kidney Transplantation - adverse effects</subject><subject>Kidney Transplantation - pathology</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases</subject><subject>Nephropathies. Renovascular diseases. Renal failure</subject><subject>Radiodiagnosis. Nmr imagery. Nmr spectrometry</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Renal failure</subject><subject>Renal transplant</subject><subject>Static fluid MRU</subject><subject>Transplant failure</subject><subject>Urinary system</subject><subject>Urography - methods</subject><issn>0720-048X</issn><issn>1872-7727</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFksuqFDEQhoMonvHoEwiSje56TNKXdAsKMniDA4IXcBcySfVM2nTSJmllXsDnNnEGBTeuQorv_6n6qxB6SMmWEto9nbYwBam3jBCeK1vCultoQ3vOKs4Zv402hDNSkab_coXuxTgRQtpmYHfRFe1J29KWbdDPD-CkxSlIFxcrXcKjNHYNgPUKOHm8Bm_9wSis_LxYo2Qy3sVneJe_MpjoHfYjjinXFR7tajT-YdIx4y6bxlSBO0qnQONZHhwUKkBWlVoxPwS5HE_30Z1R2ggPLu81-vz61afd2-rm_Zt3u5c3lWoalqpBab2XjeZ7gKHRXQ-E8YY1HYdatoxS4DC2Xccbxaje14xwyupRDYwoxVRbX6MnZ98l-G8rxCRmExXYPDn4NYquG2hPWZ_B-gyq4GMMMIolmFmGk6BElPjFJH7HL0r8pZjjz6pHF_t1P4P-q7nknYHHF0BGJe2YY1cm_uHyBJxTXvp8fuYgh_HdQBBRGSgxmgAqCe3Nfxp58Y9eWePy9uxXOEGc_Bry2qOgIjJBxMdyKeVQCC83Uvf1L-f5vF8</recordid><startdate>20090201</startdate><enddate>20090201</enddate><creator>Blondin, D</creator><creator>Koester, A</creator><creator>Andersen, K</creator><creator>Kurz, K.D</creator><creator>Moedder, U</creator><creator>Cohnen, M</creator><general>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090201</creationdate><title>Renal transplant failure due to urologic complications: Comparison of static fluid with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance urography</title><author>Blondin, D ; Koester, A ; Andersen, K ; Kurz, K.D ; Moedder, U ; Cohnen, M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c442t-9cddba4d7bee94d68e02742467e3a5211e7ef56674c21db3207123fc920cc2c53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Contrast Media</topic><topic>Contrast-enhanced MRU</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gadolinium DTPA</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hydronephrosis - diagnosis</topic><topic>Hydronephrosis - etiology</topic><topic>Image Enhancement - methods</topic><topic>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</topic><topic>Kidney Transplantation - adverse effects</topic><topic>Kidney Transplantation - pathology</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases</topic><topic>Nephropathies. Renovascular diseases. Renal failure</topic><topic>Radiodiagnosis. Nmr imagery. Nmr spectrometry</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Renal failure</topic><topic>Renal transplant</topic><topic>Static fluid MRU</topic><topic>Transplant failure</topic><topic>Urinary system</topic><topic>Urography - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Blondin, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Koester, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Andersen, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kurz, K.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moedder, U</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cohnen, M</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Blondin, D</au><au>Koester, A</au><au>Andersen, K</au><au>Kurz, K.D</au><au>Moedder, U</au><au>Cohnen, M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Renal transplant failure due to urologic complications: Comparison of static fluid with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance urography</atitle><jtitle>European journal of radiology</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Radiol</addtitle><date>2009-02-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>69</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>324</spage><epage>330</epage><pages>324-330</pages><issn>0720-048X</issn><eissn>1872-7727</eissn><coden>EJRADR</coden><abstract>Abstract Purpose Postrenal reasons of renal transplant failure can be assessed by magnetic resonance urography. This study was designed to retrospectively compare the diagnostic accuracy of static fluid (T2-)MRU compared to contrast enhanced (CE-)MRU in patients with renal transplant failure. Material and methods Thirty-five consecutive patients (14 female, 21 men; mean age 48.6 years) with renal transplant failure and sonographically detected hydronephrosis were examined both with T2-MRU as well as CE-MRU resulting in 39 MRU examinations. MRU was performed both using T2-weighted HASTE-sequence (T2-MRU) as well as Gadolinium-enhanced 3D-FLASH-sequence (CE-MRU) on a 1.5-T clinical MRI scanner (Magnetom Vision, Siemens Medical Solutions). Subjective image quality of resulting maximum intensity projection was assessed in consensus by two readers blinded to the final diagnosis, using a five point scale. MRU findings were correlated to sonography, operative results or clinical follow up. Results CE-MRU yielded a sensitivity of 85.7% (T2-MRU 76.2%), and a specificity of 83.3% (T2-MRU: 73.7%), however statistical significance was not reached. The subjective image quality was significantly better in CE-MRU. Conclusions Only concerning subjective image quality CE-MRU proved superior to T2-MRU. Yet, there was no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between T2- and CE-MRU. Thinking of incipient nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, T2-MRU can be used as reliable alternative in patients with decreased renal transplant function due to urological complications.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</pub><pmid>18055152</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.10.026</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0720-048X |
ispartof | European journal of radiology, 2009-02, Vol.69 (2), p.324-330 |
issn | 0720-048X 1872-7727 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66918128 |
source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
subjects | Biological and medical sciences Contrast Media Contrast-enhanced MRU Female Gadolinium DTPA Humans Hydronephrosis - diagnosis Hydronephrosis - etiology Image Enhancement - methods Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) Kidney Transplantation - adverse effects Kidney Transplantation - pathology Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases Nephropathies. Renovascular diseases. Renal failure Radiodiagnosis. Nmr imagery. Nmr spectrometry Radiology Renal failure Renal transplant Static fluid MRU Transplant failure Urinary system Urography - methods |
title | Renal transplant failure due to urologic complications: Comparison of static fluid with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance urography |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T00%3A50%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Renal%20transplant%20failure%20due%20to%20urologic%20complications:%20Comparison%20of%20static%20fluid%20with%20contrast-enhanced%20magnetic%20resonance%20urography&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20radiology&rft.au=Blondin,%20D&rft.date=2009-02-01&rft.volume=69&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=324&rft.epage=330&rft.pages=324-330&rft.issn=0720-048X&rft.eissn=1872-7727&rft.coden=EJRADR&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.10.026&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E66918128%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=66918128&rft_id=info:pmid/18055152&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0720048X07005438&rfr_iscdi=true |