Calculation of Kidney Volumes with Magnetic Resonance in Patients with Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease: Comparison between Methods

Author:

Di Pietro Stefano1ORCID,Torcitto Alfredo Gaetano1,Marcantoni Carmelita2,Giordano Gabriele1,Campisi Christian1,Failla Giovanni1,Saporito Licia2,Giunta Rosa2ORCID,Veroux Massimiliano3ORCID,Foti Pietro Valerio1ORCID,Palmucci Stefano4ORCID,Basile Antonio1

Affiliation:

1. Radiology Unit 1, Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Advanced Technologies “GF Ingrassia”, University Hospital Policlinico “G. Rodolico-San Marco”, University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy

2. UOSD of Nephrology and Dialysis, University Hospital Policlinico “G. Rodolico-San Marco”, 95123 Catania, Italy

3. Organ Transplant Unit, Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Advanced Technologies “GF Ingrassia”, University Hospital Policlinico “G. Rodolico-San Marco”, University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy

4. UOSD “IPTRA”, Department of Medical Surgical Sciences and Advanced Technologies “GF Ingrassia”, University Hospital Policlinico “G. Rodolico-San Marco”, University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy

Abstract

Autosomal dominant polycystic renal disease (ADPKD) is the most frequent kidney inheritable disease, characterized by the presence of numerous bilateral renal cysts, causing a progressive increase in total kidney volume (TKV) and a progressive loss of renal function. Several methods can be used to measure TKV by using MRI, and they differ in complexity, accuracy and time consumption. This study was performed to assess the performance of the ellipsoid method and the semi-automatic segmentation method, both for TKV and SKV (single kidney volume) computation. In total, 40 patients were enrolled, and 78 polycystic kidneys analyzed. Two independent operators with different levels of experience evaluated renal volumetry using both methods. Mean error for ellipsoid method for SKV computation was −2.74 ± 11.79% and 3.25 ± 10.02% for the expert and the beginner operator, respectively (p = 0.0008). A Wilcoxon test showed a statistically significant difference between the two operators for both methods (SKV p = 0.0371 and 0.0034; TKV p = 0.0416 and 0.0171 for the expert and the beginner operator, respectively). No inter-operator significant difference was found for the semi-automatic method, in contrast to the ellipsoid method. Both with a Wilcoxon test and Bland–Altman plot, statistically significant differences were found when comparing SKV and TKV measurements obtained with the two methods for both operators, even if the differences are stronger for the beginner operator than for the expert one. The semi-automatic segmentation method showed more inter-observer reproducibility. The ellipsoid method, in contrast, appears to be affected by greater inter-observer variability, especially when performed by operators with limited experience.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

Clinical Biochemistry

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3