ArticleJournal of ultrasound2022
Assessment of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) and Computed Tomography (CT) diagnostic accuracy in the evaluation of challenging cystic renal masses.
Article in Journal of ultrasound, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the follow-up of Bosniak IIF cystic renal lesions.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Clinical value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound combined with quantitative analysis in Bosniak ≥ II cystic renal masses.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of renal masses in the pre-transplant setting: literature review with case highlights.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Review
- Contrast-enhanced US Bosniak Classification: intra- and inter-rater agreement, confounding features, and diagnostic performance.Insights into imaging · 2024Article
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound-based Bosniak classification for evaluating of a cystic renal mass: a rare case description of renal hemolymphangioma.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and computed tomography (CT) within Bosniak IIF/III categories.
methodsAfter cystic renal mass diagnosis by contrast-enhanced CT, all patients with Bosniak score ≥ II also underwent CEUS between March 2017 and March 2019. Their exams were retrospectively analyzed. One experienced uro-radiologist performed every CEUS and reviewed the exams according to the EFSUMB 2020 Position Statement, while blinded to clinical data. CT Bosniak scores were retrospectively given blindly by two uro-radiologists (CT 1 and CT 2). We compared CEUS, CT 1 and CT 2 scores to clinical findings and histological tests. Clinical performance characteristics and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUCs) were determined separately for CEUS and CT, and then compared.
results101 cystic masses were analyzed. In Bosniak categories IIF and III, the AUCs were 0.854 for CT 1, 0.779 for CT 2, and 0.746 for CEUS.
conclusionDespite some statistical limitations, this study confirms that among cystic renal masses, those classified as Bosniak IIF and III are the most difficult to assess. The diagnostic performances of CEUS and CT are similar within this group. However, in experienced hands, CEUS could be valuable in further evaluation of ambiguous cystic masses, and in more ductile, safer, and cost-effective surveillance of those classified as Bosniak IIF and III. When challenging cystic renal masses occur, CEUS is a useful tool for clinical management and for the follow-up of non-surgical lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.