Can MR contribute to the diagnosis of nephroblastomatosis ? A report of one case

Presenting one case of nephroblastomatosis (NB) the diagnostic approach by different imaging modalities is discussed. Ultrasound (US) of the kidneys as a basic examination showed one focus of NB but missed two further foci which were clearly shown by contrast enhanced CT and MR. Contrast enhanced CT...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Pediatric radiology 1991-11, Vol.21 (7), p.533-535
Hauptverfasser: HAUSEGGER, K. A, FOTTER, R, FLÜCKIGER, F, SORANTIN, E
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 535
container_issue 7
container_start_page 533
container_title Pediatric radiology
container_volume 21
creator HAUSEGGER, K. A
FOTTER, R
FLÜCKIGER, F
SORANTIN, E
description Presenting one case of nephroblastomatosis (NB) the diagnostic approach by different imaging modalities is discussed. Ultrasound (US) of the kidneys as a basic examination showed one focus of NB but missed two further foci which were clearly shown by contrast enhanced CT and MR. Contrast enhanced CT has been considered to be the most sensitive method in primary diagnosis of NB and follow up. However, in our case contrast enhanced MR examinations showed the foci of NB more clearly than CT. Since the false negative rate of MR is not yet known, we recommend the use of a contrast enhanced MR study parallel to a basic CT examination. If MR findings are consistent with CT findings, no further CT examinations are necessary for follow-up. Since US can miss a considerable amount of foci of NB, basic evaluation of NB and associated lesions by US alone should be avoided.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/BF02011736
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72590165</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>72590165</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c270t-f84d7dca7ec2581116b396d7f49b04ac0d0576a3d516244857c4e74b5df6e58b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpF0M1Lw0AQBfBFlFqrF-_CHsSDEJ3JfiUnqcWqUFFEz2Gz2dhIkq27m4P_va0tehqY9-MdHiGnCFcIoK5v55AComJyj4yRszTBPM_2yRgYYAKc54fkKIRPAGAC2YiMUEqWMhiTl5nu6dMrNa6PvimHaGl0NC4trRr90bvQBOpq2tvV0ruy1SG6Tsff9w2dUm9XzseNcL2lRgd7TA5q3QZ7srsT8j6_e5s9JIvn-8fZdJGYVEFM6oxXqjJaWZOKDBFlyXJZqZrnJXBtoAKhpGaVQJlynglluFW8FFUtrchKNiEX296Vd1-DDbHommBs2-reuiEUKhU5oBRreLmFxrsQvK2LlW867b8LhGIzX_E_3xqf7VqHsrPVP93utc7Pd7kORre1171pwh8TAkEyxX4AYAF1Mw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>72590165</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Can MR contribute to the diagnosis of nephroblastomatosis ? A report of one case</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>HAUSEGGER, K. A ; FOTTER, R ; FLÜCKIGER, F ; SORANTIN, E</creator><creatorcontrib>HAUSEGGER, K. A ; FOTTER, R ; FLÜCKIGER, F ; SORANTIN, E</creatorcontrib><description>Presenting one case of nephroblastomatosis (NB) the diagnostic approach by different imaging modalities is discussed. Ultrasound (US) of the kidneys as a basic examination showed one focus of NB but missed two further foci which were clearly shown by contrast enhanced CT and MR. Contrast enhanced CT has been considered to be the most sensitive method in primary diagnosis of NB and follow up. However, in our case contrast enhanced MR examinations showed the foci of NB more clearly than CT. Since the false negative rate of MR is not yet known, we recommend the use of a contrast enhanced MR study parallel to a basic CT examination. If MR findings are consistent with CT findings, no further CT examinations are necessary for follow-up. Since US can miss a considerable amount of foci of NB, basic evaluation of NB and associated lesions by US alone should be avoided.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0301-0449</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-1998</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/BF02011736</identifier><identifier>PMID: 1663230</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PDRYA5</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin: Springer</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Female ; Humans ; Infant ; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) ; Kidney Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Medical sciences ; Neoplasms, Multiple Primary - diagnosis ; Wilms Tumor - diagnosis</subject><ispartof>Pediatric radiology, 1991-11, Vol.21 (7), p.533-535</ispartof><rights>1992 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c270t-f84d7dca7ec2581116b396d7f49b04ac0d0576a3d516244857c4e74b5df6e58b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=5510637$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1663230$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>HAUSEGGER, K. A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FOTTER, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FLÜCKIGER, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SORANTIN, E</creatorcontrib><title>Can MR contribute to the diagnosis of nephroblastomatosis ? A report of one case</title><title>Pediatric radiology</title><addtitle>Pediatr Radiol</addtitle><description>Presenting one case of nephroblastomatosis (NB) the diagnostic approach by different imaging modalities is discussed. Ultrasound (US) of the kidneys as a basic examination showed one focus of NB but missed two further foci which were clearly shown by contrast enhanced CT and MR. Contrast enhanced CT has been considered to be the most sensitive method in primary diagnosis of NB and follow up. However, in our case contrast enhanced MR examinations showed the foci of NB more clearly than CT. Since the false negative rate of MR is not yet known, we recommend the use of a contrast enhanced MR study parallel to a basic CT examination. If MR findings are consistent with CT findings, no further CT examinations are necessary for follow-up. Since US can miss a considerable amount of foci of NB, basic evaluation of NB and associated lesions by US alone should be avoided.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infant</subject><subject>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</subject><subject>Kidney Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Neoplasms, Multiple Primary - diagnosis</subject><subject>Wilms Tumor - diagnosis</subject><issn>0301-0449</issn><issn>1432-1998</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1991</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpF0M1Lw0AQBfBFlFqrF-_CHsSDEJ3JfiUnqcWqUFFEz2Gz2dhIkq27m4P_va0tehqY9-MdHiGnCFcIoK5v55AComJyj4yRszTBPM_2yRgYYAKc54fkKIRPAGAC2YiMUEqWMhiTl5nu6dMrNa6PvimHaGl0NC4trRr90bvQBOpq2tvV0ruy1SG6Tsff9w2dUm9XzseNcL2lRgd7TA5q3QZ7srsT8j6_e5s9JIvn-8fZdJGYVEFM6oxXqjJaWZOKDBFlyXJZqZrnJXBtoAKhpGaVQJlynglluFW8FFUtrchKNiEX296Vd1-DDbHommBs2-reuiEUKhU5oBRreLmFxrsQvK2LlW867b8LhGIzX_E_3xqf7VqHsrPVP93utc7Pd7kORre1171pwh8TAkEyxX4AYAF1Mw</recordid><startdate>19911101</startdate><enddate>19911101</enddate><creator>HAUSEGGER, K. A</creator><creator>FOTTER, R</creator><creator>FLÜCKIGER, F</creator><creator>SORANTIN, E</creator><general>Springer</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>19911101</creationdate><title>Can MR contribute to the diagnosis of nephroblastomatosis ? A report of one case</title><author>HAUSEGGER, K. A ; FOTTER, R ; FLÜCKIGER, F ; SORANTIN, E</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c270t-f84d7dca7ec2581116b396d7f49b04ac0d0576a3d516244857c4e74b5df6e58b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1991</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infant</topic><topic>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</topic><topic>Kidney Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Neoplasms, Multiple Primary - diagnosis</topic><topic>Wilms Tumor - diagnosis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>HAUSEGGER, K. A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FOTTER, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FLÜCKIGER, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SORANTIN, E</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>Pediatric radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>HAUSEGGER, K. A</au><au>FOTTER, R</au><au>FLÜCKIGER, F</au><au>SORANTIN, E</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Can MR contribute to the diagnosis of nephroblastomatosis ? A report of one case</atitle><jtitle>Pediatric radiology</jtitle><addtitle>Pediatr Radiol</addtitle><date>1991-11-01</date><risdate>1991</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>533</spage><epage>535</epage><pages>533-535</pages><issn>0301-0449</issn><eissn>1432-1998</eissn><coden>PDRYA5</coden><abstract>Presenting one case of nephroblastomatosis (NB) the diagnostic approach by different imaging modalities is discussed. Ultrasound (US) of the kidneys as a basic examination showed one focus of NB but missed two further foci which were clearly shown by contrast enhanced CT and MR. Contrast enhanced CT has been considered to be the most sensitive method in primary diagnosis of NB and follow up. However, in our case contrast enhanced MR examinations showed the foci of NB more clearly than CT. Since the false negative rate of MR is not yet known, we recommend the use of a contrast enhanced MR study parallel to a basic CT examination. If MR findings are consistent with CT findings, no further CT examinations are necessary for follow-up. Since US can miss a considerable amount of foci of NB, basic evaluation of NB and associated lesions by US alone should be avoided.</abstract><cop>Berlin</cop><pub>Springer</pub><pmid>1663230</pmid><doi>10.1007/BF02011736</doi><tpages>3</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0301-0449
ispartof Pediatric radiology, 1991-11, Vol.21 (7), p.533-535
issn 0301-0449
1432-1998
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72590165
source MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals
subjects Biological and medical sciences
Female
Humans
Infant
Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)
Kidney Neoplasms - diagnosis
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Medical sciences
Neoplasms, Multiple Primary - diagnosis
Wilms Tumor - diagnosis
title Can MR contribute to the diagnosis of nephroblastomatosis ? A report of one case
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T05%3A09%3A41IST&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=Can%20MR%20contribute%20to%20the%20diagnosis%20of%20nephroblastomatosis%20?%20A%20report%20of%20one%20case&rft.jtitle=Pediatric%20radiology&rft.au=HAUSEGGER,%20K.%20A&rft.date=1991-11-01&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=533&rft.epage=535&rft.pages=533-535&rft.issn=0301-0449&rft.eissn=1432-1998&rft.coden=PDRYA5&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/BF02011736&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E72590165%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=72590165&rft_id=info:pmid/1663230&rfr_iscdi=true