Imaging evaluation of renal masses

Abstract

Introduction: This article demonstrate the imaging characteristics of cystic and solid renal masses, along with a summary of identified imaging criteria that may be of use to differentiate masses that are more likely to be benign from those that are more likely to be malignant. Aim and Objectives: To evaluate the patients with renal cancer by ultrasonography (USG) and computed tomography (CT) and to compare the findings of USG and CT. Material and Methods: Present study was conducted on 60 patients presented with renal masses, initially evaluated with ultrasonography (USG) and later on characterization of the mass was done by using computed tomography (CT). Results: CT has higher sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) on correlation with USG. Conclusion: CT is capable of detecting tumor invasion of perinephric fat and adjacent muscles, which cannot usually seen by ultrasound. While both CT and ultrasound demonstrate venous and retroperitoneal tumor extension, CT is more reliable.