ArticleWorld journal of urology2024
Comparing Sonazoid contrast-enhanced ultrasound to contrast-enhanced CT and MRI for differentially diagnosing renal lesions: a prospective multicenter study.
Article in World journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical application of radiomics for the prediction of treatment outcome and survival in patients with renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review.World journal of urology · 2024Pooled it
- Renal cell carcinoma of the native kidney in renal transplant recipients: case report and literature review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound of collecting duct carcinoma in the renal: a case report misdiagnosed as renal abscess on computed tomography scan.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced (CE) ultrasound using Sonazoid (SNZ-CEUS) by comparing with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) for differentiating benign and malignant renal masses. MATERIALS AND
methods306 consecutive patients (from 7 centers) with renal masses (40 benign tumors, 266 malignant tumors) diagnosed by both SNZ-CEUS, CE-CT or CE-MRI were enrolled between September 2020 and February 2021. The examinations were performed within 7 days, but the sequence was not fixed. Histologic results were available for 301 of 306 (98.37%) lesions and 5 lesions were considered benign after at least 2 year follow-up without change in size and image characteristics. The diagnostic performances were evaluated by sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and compared by McNemar's test.
resultsIn the head-to-head comparison, SNZ-CEUS and CE-MRI had comparable sensitivity (95.60 vs. 94.51%, P = 0.997), specificity (65.22 vs. 73.91%, P = 0.752), positive predictive value (91.58 vs. 93.48%) and negative predictive value (78.95 vs. 77.27%); SNZ-CEUS and CE-CT showed similar sensitivity (97.31 vs. 96.24%, P = 0.724); however, SNZ-CEUS had relatively lower than specificity than CE-CT (59.09 vs. 68.18%, P = 0.683). For nodules > 4 cm, CE-MRI demonstrated higher specificity than SNZ-CEUS (90.91 vs. 72.73%, P = 0.617) without compromise the sensitivity.
conclusionsSNZ-CEUS, CE-CT, and CE-MRI demonstrate desirable and comparable sensitivity for the differentiation of renal mass. However, the specificity of all three imaging modalities is not satisfactory. SNZ-CEUS may be a suitable alternative modality for patients with renal dysfunction and those allergic to gadolinium or iodine-based agents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38720010What 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.