2009
DOI: 10.1007/s00467-008-1099-0
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sensitivity of ultrasonography in detecting renal parenchymal defects: 6 years’ follow-up

Abstract: While (99m)Tc-dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) scanning is still considered the most accurate method for the assessment of renal parenchymal defects (RPDs), our study 6 years previously suggested that ultrasonography (US) could be a safe and efficient substitute for this purpose, provided that it is reliably performed and that renal function parameters are followed. By comparison of the original and follow-up study data from 67 children, the accuracy of our recommendations was re-evaluated. US was performed and … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…DMSA is the gold standard for assesing renal parenchymal defects, but it is the second choice due to radiation exposure and cost. 6,7 Renal defects located centrally over the pelvicalyceal system were considered normal. There could also be ambiguous cases of renal atrophy with hydronephrosis, leading to normal reports.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…DMSA is the gold standard for assesing renal parenchymal defects, but it is the second choice due to radiation exposure and cost. 6,7 Renal defects located centrally over the pelvicalyceal system were considered normal. There could also be ambiguous cases of renal atrophy with hydronephrosis, leading to normal reports.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Systematic approaches to analyze DMSA scan and define renal scarring with US have been proposed, but they are not systematically used in clinic. [10][11][12] Additionally, Levart et al [8][9] concluded twice that US was sensitive enough to identify clinically significant scars. In their studies, US detected all severe renal parenchymal defects (5/5, 100%) seen on DMSA, with a lower sensitivity to detect moderate (19/24, 79.2%) and mild (15/44, 31.8%) defects.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For this reason, we relied on available radiologist reports, even if our pediatric urologists are used to reviewing US images. 5,7,9,12 According to Barry et al, US could achieve excellent sensitivity and specificity to detect renal scars by dedicated pediatric radiologists using state-of-the-art equipment. 12 Unfortunately, these circumstances did not reproduce the daily clinical scenario.…”
Section: Detecting Renal Anomalies In Childrenmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation