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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Pediatric radiology 1991-11, Vol.21 (7), p.533-535 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
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&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 |