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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of radiology 2009-02, Vol.69 (2), p.324-330
Hauptverfasser: Blondin, D, Koester, A, Andersen, K, Kurz, K.D, Moedder, U, Cohnen, M
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>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=21177175$$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