Diagnostic Value of Clear Cell Likelihood Score v1.0 and v2.0 for Common Subtypes of Small Renal Masses: A Multicenter Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: Clear cell likelihood score (ccLS) is reliable for diagnosing small renal masses (SRMs). However, the diagnostic value of Clear cell likelihood score version 1.0 (ccLS v1.0) and v2.0 for common subtypes of SRMs might be a potential score extension. PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic performance and interobserver agreement of ccLS v1.0 and v2.0 for characterizing five common subtypes of SRMs. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. POPULATION: 797 patients (563 males, 234 females; mean age, 53 ± 12 years) with 867 histologically proven renal masses. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCES: 3.0 and 1.5 T/T2 weighted imaging, T1 weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, a dual-echo chemical shift (in- and opposed-phase) T1 weighted imaging, multiphase dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging. ASSESSMENT: Six abdominal radiologists were trained in the ccLS algorithm and independently scored each SRM using ccLS v1.0 and v2.0, respectively. All SRMs had definite pathological results. The pooled area under curve (AUC), accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated to evaluate the diagnostic performance of ccLS v1.0 and v2.0 for characterizing common subtypes of SRMs. The average κ values were calculated to evaluate the interobserver agreement of the two scoring versions. STATISTICAL TESTS: Random-effects logistic regression; Receiver operating characteristic analysis; DeLong test; Weighted Kappa test; Z test. The statistical significance level was P < 0.05. RESULTS: The pooled AUCs of clear cell likelihood score version 2.0 (ccLS v2.0) were statistically superior to those of ccLS v1.0 for diagnosing clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) (0.907 vs. 0.851), papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) (0.926 vs. 0.888), renal oncocytoma (RO) (0.745 vs. 0.679), and angiomyolipoma without visible fat (AMLwvf) (0.826 vs. 0.766). Interobserver agreement for SRMs between ccLS v1.0 and v2.0 is comparable and was not statistically significant (P = 0.993). CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of ccLS v2.0 surpasses that of ccLS v1.0 for characterizing ccRCC, pRCC, RO, and AMLwvf. Especially, the standardized algorithm has optimal performance for ccRCC and pRCC. ccLS has potential as a supportive clinical tool. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 4. TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

Differentiation between renal epithelioid angiomyolipoma and clear cell renal cell carcinoma using clear cell likelihood score.

PURPOSE: Clear cell likelihood score (ccLS) may be a reliable diagnostic method for distinguishing renal epithelioid angiomyolipoma (EAML) and clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). In this study, we aim to explore the value of ccLS in differentiating EAML from ccRCC. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis in which 27 EAML patients and 60 ccRCC patients underwent preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at our institution. Two radiologists trained in the ccLS algorithm scored independently and the consistency of their interpretation was evaluated. The difference of the ccLS score was compared between EAML and ccRCC in the whole study cohort and two subgroups [small renal masses (SRM; ≤ 4 cm) and large renal masses (LRM; > 4 cm)]. RESULTS: In total, 87 patients (59 men, 28 women; mean age, 55±11 years) with 90 renal masses (EAML: ccRCC = 1: 2) were identified. The interobserver agreement of two radiologists for the ccLS system to differentiate EAML from ccRCC was good (k = 0.71). The ccLS score in the EAML group and the ccRCC group ranged from 1 to 5 (73.3% in scores 1-2) and 2 to 5 (76.7% in scores 4-5), respectively, with statistically significant differences (P < 0.001). With the threshold value of 2, ccLS can distinguish EAML from ccRCC with the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 87.8%, 95.0%, 73.3%, 87.7%, and 88.0%, respectively. The AUC (area under the curve) was 0.913. And the distribution of the ccLS score between the two diseases was not affected by tumor size (P = 0.780). CONCLUSION: The ccLS can distinguish EAML from ccRCC with high accuracy and efficiency.

Transurethral front-firing Greenlight bladder autoaugmentation for bladder contracture: technique and clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a novel transurethral front-firing Greenlight bladder autoaugmentation for the treatment of bladder contracture and report initial clinical outcomes. METHODS: Between April 2014 and August 2015, five patients diagnosed with contracted bladder were all refractory to conservative treatment and received novel transurethral autoaugmentation. CT scan and urodynamics examination were conducted before operation for disease assessment. Mucosal and muscular layers of bladder wall in fundus were incised vertically and horizontally with front-firing Greenlight laser to enlarge bladder capacity in the operation. Imaging examination and periodical urodynamics study were performed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of the procedure in postoperative follow-up. RESULTS: Transurethral front-firing Greenlight bladder autoaugmentation was performed successfully on all the patients. The mean operative time was 59 min (range 52-65 min) with no significant blood loss. Urodynamic parameters of these patients after operation improved significantly compared with those before operation. Average maximum cystometric capacity (Vmax) increased from 91.2 to 333 ml (p < 0.01), average maximum flow rate (Qmax) ascended from 12.6 to 18.62 ml/min (p < 0.01), and average flow rate (Q(ave)) also increased from 5.74 to 13.18 ml/min (p < 0.01). At the last follow-up, all the patients could void spontaneously with good bladder emptying and their symptoms improved significantly. CONCLUSION: Our novel transurethral front-firing Greenlight bladder autoaugmentation is a safe and effective treatment for contracted bladders. Future studies with larger sample size and long-term follow-up are needed to confirm our findings.

[Paratesticular embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma: report of 5 cases and review of the literature].

OBJECTIVE: To improve the diagnosis and treatment of paratesticular embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma (PER). METHODS: We retrospectively studied the clinical data of 5 cases of PER treated from 1997 to 2009 and reviewed the relevant literature, focusing on its clinical manifestations, diagnosis and treatment. RESULTS: The 5 cases of PER, 2 involving the spermatic cord, 2 the testis and 1 the tunica vaginalis, were all treated by radical orchiectomy. Pathologically, 2 cases were classified as stage I, 1 as stage II and 2 as stage IV. Postoperatively, 2 of the patients received chemotherapy and the other 3 refused adjunctive therapy. The patients were followed up for 6, 12, 18 and 28 months, respectively. Four of them remained free from relapse and metastasis, and 1 stage IV patient died of multiple metastasis at 6 months. CONCLUSION: Early diagnosis, radical orchiectomy and adjunctive chemo- or radio-therapy are effective means to the treatment of PER.