Background: Due to rapid pace in development of imaging techniques and increasing number of investigations being done, more number of renal masses are discovered incidentally during evaluation of unrelated or unspecific symptoms. Hence it is vital to differentiate neoplastic and non-neoplastic masses. Among the neoplastic masses, there is a need to differentiate benign and malignant masses so that appropriate treatment strategies like nephron sparing surgery, radio frequency ablation etc. can be planned at an early stage and avoiding unnecessary radical treatments for improved patients survival.

Methods: Thirty one non-consecutive patients belonging to all ages and both sexes admitted into the various clinical departments of Krishna institute of medical sciences, Karad who had presented with suspected renal mass by clinical signs and symptoms were examined on USG/CECT with protocol  were included in our study.

Results: Ultrasound is the primary imaging modality of choice since it is inexpensive, easy to perform and no ionizing. On USG, the renal lesions are classified as solid or cystic. CECT for characterization and staging however histopathology remains gold standard.

Conclusions: Computed Tomography (Multidetector) is the imaging modality of choice for further evaluation and characterization. Contrast enhanced CT is done in four phases viz., unenhanced, corticomedullary, nephrographic and excretory phase especially in cases of malignancy like renal cell carcinoma and benign conditions like angiomyolipoma and abscess is sufficient. However histopathological is the gold standard for diagnosis of various renal masses.

Keywords: Computed tomography, Renal masses.

1. Catalano C, Fraioli F, Laghi A, Napoli A, Pediconi F, Danti M, et al. High-resolution multidetector CT in the preoperative evaluation of patients with renal cell carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;180(5):1271-7.
2. Tsili AC, Argyropoulou MI. Advances of multidetector computed tomography in the characterization and staging of renal cell carcinoma. World J Radiol. 2015;7(6):110-27.
3. Ng CS, Wood CG, Silverman PM, Tannir NM, Tamboli P, Sandler CM. Renal cell carcinoma: diagnosis, staging, and surveillance. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191(4):1220-32.
4. Agnihotri, S., Kumar, J., Jain, M., Kapoor, R. &Mandhani, A. Renal cell carcinoma in India demonstrates early age of onset & a late stage of presentation. Indian J. Med. Res. 140, 624–629 (2014).
5. Sun, M. et al. A stage-for-stage and grade-for-grade analysis of cancer-specific mortality rates in renal cell carcinoma according to age: a competing-risks regression analysis. Eur. Urol. 60, 1152–1159 (2011).
6. Skinner, D. G., Colvin, R. B., Vermillion, C. D., Pfister, R. C. &Leadbetter, W. F. Diagnosis and management of renal cell carcinoma A clinical and pathologic study of 309 cases. Cancer 28, 1165–1177 (1971).
7. Hatimota, P., Vashist, S., Aggarwal, K., Kapoor, A. & Gupta, N. P. Spectrum of US and CT findings in renal neoplasms with pathologic correlation. Indian J. Radiol. Imaging 15, 117 (2005).
8. Tsui, K.-H. Et al. Renal Cell Carcinoma: Prognostic Significance of Incidentally Detected Tumors. J. UROL. 163, 426–430 (2000).
9. Jemal, A. et al. Cancer statistics, 2006. CA. Cancer J. Clin. 56, 106–130 (2006).
10. Sivaramakrishna, B. et al. Pattern of metastases in renal cell carcinoma: A single institution study. Indian J. Cancer 42, 173 (2005).
11. Raza SA, Sohaib SA, Sahdev A, Bharwani N, Heenan S, Verma H, et al. Centrally infiltrating renal masses on CT: differentiating intrarenal transitional cell carcinoma from centrally located renal cell carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198(4):846-53.

Dr Shrishail Adke

Department of Radiodiagnosis, Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, Karad, Maharashtra, India

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.