RENAL ONCOCYTOMA: EVALUATION OUR FILE OF PATIENTS AND CT FINDINGS
Authors:
Martin Fabišovský 1; Jan Krhut 1; Henryk Fikoczek 2; Jana Dvořáčková 3
Authors place of work:
Urologické oddělení FN Ostrava
1; Radiodignostický ústav FN Ostrava
2; Ústav patologie FN Ostrava
3
Published in the journal:
Ces Urol 2011; 15(4): 237-243
Category:
Original article
Summary
Aim:
The objective of this paper is to identify patients with the histological finding of renal oncocytoma among the patients who underwent kidney surgery for tumor in our department of urology during the years 2003–2010; to assess characteristics of the obtained file and to evaluate the possibilities of pre-operative assessment of the tumor benign character based on the CT finding.
Method:
We evaluated patients who underwent a surgery for a solid kidney expansion during the years 2003–2010 in our urology department retrospectively. The patients with a histological prove of renal oncocytoma were identified. History taking data and demographic data were evaluated from the documentation; also the types of performed kidney surgeries in the sub-file of patients were evaluated. CT documentation was evaluated by a radiologist with an aim to predict the benign character of the expansion on its basis.
Results:
In the period of January 2003 to December 2010 total of 602 patients were operated with the kidney expansion in the department of urology of the University hospital in Ostrava- Poruba. In 216 cases the open transperitoneal nephrectomy was performed, in 92 cases the nephrectomy was performed via a lumbotomy approach. 204 patients underwent a laparoscopic nephrectomy, in 90 cases a partial resection was performed. Renal oncocytoma was diagnosed in 20 cases in total during the histological examination. The prevalence of this benign tumor in our file was 3.3% of the operated expansions. No specific common signs that could be used in the pre-operative distinction of the expansion biological character were identified during the revision of the pre-operative CT findings in the file of patients with oncocytoma.
Conclusion:
The prevalence of oncocytoma in our file of patients was 3.3%. Nor by the retrospective evaluation of the RTG documentation we were able to identify the reliable specific common signs that could predict the pre-operative distinction of the benign biological character of the expansion based on the CT findings.
Key words:
benign renal tumor, CT examination, oncocytoma, preoperative diagnosis.
Zdroje
1. Chao DH, Zisman A, Pantuck AJ, et al. Changing concepts in the management of renal oncocytoma. Urology 2002; 59: 635–642.
2. Michal M, Hes O, Mukenšnabl P. Nádory ledvin dospělého věku. Plzeň: Euroverlag 2000; 55–65.
3. Schlomer B, Figenshau RS, Yan Y, et al. Pathological features of renal neoplazma classified by size and symptomatology. J Urol 2006; 176: 1317–1320.
4. Schmidbauer J, Remzi M, Mamarsadeghi M, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography- guided percutaneous biopsy of renal masses. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 1003–1012.
5. Frank I, Blute ML, Cheville JC, et al. Solid renal tumors: an analysis of pathological features related to tumor size. J Urol 2003; 170: 2217–2220.
6. Dechet CB, Sebo T, Farrow G, et al. Prospective analysis of intraoperative frozen needle biopsy of solid renal masses in adults. J Urol 1999; 162: 1282–1285.
7. Schatz SM, Lieber MM. Update on oncocytoma. Current Urology Reports 2003; 4: 30–35.
8. Remzi M, Marberger M. Renal tumor biopsies for evaluation of small renal tumors: Why, in whom, ad how? Eur Urol 2009; 55: 359–367.
9. Dechet CB, Bostwick DG, Blute ML, et al. Renal oncocytoma: multifocality, bilateralism, metachronous tumor development and coexistent renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 1999; 162: 40–42.
10. Licht MR, Novick AC, Tubbs RR, et al. Renal oncocytoma: clinical and biological correlates. J Urol 1993; 150: 1380–1383.
11. Sydor A, Sulowicz W, Stompor T, et al. Two consecutive cases of renal oncocytomatosis in a single-center experience. Clinical Nephrology 2009; 71: 433–440.
12. Tickoo SK, Reuter VE, Amin MB, et al. Renal oncocytosis: a morphologic study of fourteen cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1999; 23: 1094–1101.
13. Perez-Ordonez B, Hamed G, Campbell S, et al. Renal oncocytoma: a clinicopathologic study of 70 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1997; 21: 871–883.
14. Harmon WJ, King BF, Lieber MM. Renal oncocytoma: magnetic resonance imaging characteristics. J Urol 1996; 155: 863–867.
15. Hora M, Eret V, Ferda JJ, et al. Novinky v diagnostice a chirurgické léčbě nádorů ledvin. Ces Urol 2009; 13(1): 21–23.
16. Choudhary S, Rajesh A, Mayer NJ, et al. CT features cannot reliably distinguish oncocytoma from other renal neoplasms. Clinical Radiology 2009; 64: 517–522.
17. Neuzillet Y, Lechevallier E, Andre M, et al. Follow-up of renal oncocytoma diagnosed by percutaneous tumor biopsy. Urology 2005; 66: 1181–1185.
18. Chawla SN, Crispen PL, Hanlon AL, et al. The natural history of observed enhancing renal masses: Meta-analysis and review of the world literature. J Urol 2006; 175: 425–431.
19. Siu W, Hafez KS, Johnston WK, Wolf jr. JS. Growth rates of renal cell carcinoma and oncocytoma under surveillance are similar. Urol Oncol 2007; 25: 115–119.
20. Kassouf W, Aprikian AG, Laplante M, et al. Natural history of renal masses followed expectantly. J Urol 2004; 171: 111–113.
21. Bird VG, Kanagarajah P, Morillo G, et al. Differentiation of oncocytoma and renal cell carcinoma in small renal masses (< 4 cm): the role of 4-phase computerized tomography. World J Urol; Published online: 18 August 2010.
22. Volpe A, Mattar K, Finelli A, et al. Contemporary results of percutaneous biopsy of 100 small renal masses: a single center experience. J Urol 2008; 180: 2333–2337.
23. Vasudevan A, Davies RJ, Shannon BA, Cohen RJ. Incidental renal tumours: the frequency of benign lesions and the role of preoperative core biopsy. BJU Int 2006; 97: 946–949.
24. Neuzillet Y, Lechevallier E, Andre M, et al. Accuracy and clinical role of fine needle percutaneous biopsy with computerized tomography guidance of small renal masses. J Urol 2004; 171: 1802–1805.
25. Dechet CB, Zincke H, Sebo TJ, et al. Prospective analysis of computerized tomography and needle biopsy with permanent sectioning to determine the nature of solid renal masses in adults. J Urol 2003; 169: 71–74.
Štítky
Paediatric urologist Nephrology UrologyČlánok vyšiel v časopise
Czech Urology
2011 Číslo 4
Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle
- EUROPEAN BOARD OF UROLOGY
- Urachal carcinoma
-
Clean intermittent catheterization in the treatment of neurogenic dysfunctions of the lower urinary tract after spinal cord injury – comparison of the results of hydrophilic
Coated and standard PVC catheters - Strangulation injury of the penis – our experience with metallic materials