Is there a contemporary role for percutaneous needle biopsy in the era of small renal masses?

BJU International

Volumn 109, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 867-872

  Phé, Véronique ^a,d   Yates, David R ^a   Renard Penna, Raphaële ^a   Cussenot, Olivier ^b,c   Rouprêt, Morgan ^a,c  

^a PITIÉ SALPÊTRIÈRE HOSPITAL   (France)

^b HÔPITAL TENON   (France)

^c CeRePP Group   (France)

^d SORBONNE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

Author keywords

ablative treatments; active surveillance; biopsy; computerized tomography; fine needle aspiration; nephron sparing surgery; renal masses; ultrasonography

Indexed keywords

ARTERIOVENOUS FISTULA; ARTICLE; ASPIRATION BIOPSY; BLEEDING; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DATA ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; HEMATOMA; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KIDNEY BIOPSY; KIDNEY CANCER; KIDNEY TUMOR; NEEDLE BIOPSY; NEPHRECTOMY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; ONCOCYTOMA; PERCUTANEOUS BIOPSY; PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREATMENT INDICATION; TUMOR CLASSIFICATION; TUMOR LOCALIZATION; TUMOR VOLUME;

BIOPSY, FINE-NEEDLE; CARCINOMA, RENAL CELL; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HUMANS; KIDNEY; KIDNEY NEOPLASMS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84857642008     PISSN: 14644096     EISSN: 1464410X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10544.x     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Hollingsworth JM, Miller DC, Daignault S, et al,. Rising incidence of small renal masses: a need to reassess treatment effect. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006; 98: 1331-4 (Pubitemid 44530728)
2. Cooperberg MR, Mallin K, Ritchey J, et al,. Decreasing size at diagnosis of stage 1 renal cell carcinoma: analysis from the National Cancer Data Base, 1993 to 2004. J Urol 2008; 179: 2131-5
3. Volpe A, Panzarella T, Rendon RA, et al,. The natural history of incidentally detected small renal masses. Cancer 2004; 100: 738-45 (Pubitemid 38176851)
4. Remzi M, Ozsoy M, Klingler HC, et al,. Are small renal tumors harmless? Analysis of histopathological features according to tumors 4 cm or less in diameter. J Urol 2006; 176: 896-9 (Pubitemid 44142601)
5. Kidney Cancer Statistics-UK. Available at
6. Murai M, Oya M,. Renal cell carcinoma: etiology, incidence and epidemiology. Curr Opin Urol 2004; 14: 229-33 (Pubitemid 38932351)
7. Chawla SN, Crispen PL, Hanlon AL, et al,. The natural history of observed enhancing renal masses: meta-analysis and review of the world literature. J Urol 2006; 175: 425-31 (Pubitemid 43067318)
8. Frank I, Blute ML, Cheville JC, et al,. Solid renal tumors: an analysis of pathological features related to tumor size. J Urol 2003; 170: c2217-20
9. Eggener SE, Rubenstein JN, Smith ND, et al,. Renal tumors in young adults. J Urol 2004; 171: 106-10 (Pubitemid 37549101)
10. Kunkle DA, Crispen PL, Chen DY, et al,. Enhancing renal masses with zero net growth during active surveillance. J Urol 2007; 177: 849-54 (Pubitemid 46216338)
11. Klatte T, Patard JJ, de Martino M, et al,. Tumor size does not predict risk of metastatic disease or prognosis of small renal cell carcinomas. J Urol 2008; 179: 1719-26
12. Wilson SR, Burns PN,. Microbubble-enhanced US in body imaging: what role? Radiology 2010; 257: 24-39
13. Rioja J, Rodriguez-Fraile M, Lima-Favaretto R, et al,. Role of positron emission tomography in urological oncology. BJU Int 2010; 106: 1578-93
14. Divgi CR, Pandit-Taskar N, Jungbluth AA, et al,. Preoperative characterisation of clear-cell renal carcinoma using iodine-124-labelled antibody chimeric G250 (124I-cG250) and PET in patients with renal masses: a phase I trial. Lancet Oncol 2007; 8: 304-10 (Pubitemid 46464522)
15. Kim JK, Kim SH, Jang YJ, et al,. Renal angiomyolipoma with minimal fat: differentiation from other neoplasms at double-echo chemical shift FLASH MR imaging. Radiology 2006; 2391: 174-80
16. Remzi M, Katzenbeisser D, Waldert M, et al,. Renal tumour size measured radiologically before surgery is an unreliable variable for predicting histopathological features: benign tumours are not necessarily small. BJU Int 2007; 99: 1002-6 (Pubitemid 46587912)
17. Jewett MA, Zuniga A,. Renal tumor natural history: the rationale and role for active surveillance. Urol Clin North Am 2008; 35: 627-34
18. Crispen PL, Wong YN, Greenberg RE, et al,. Predicting growth of solid renal masses under active surveillance. Urol Oncol 2008; 26: 555-9
19. Kunkle DA, Egleston BL, Uzzo RG,. Excise, ablate or observe: the small renal mass dilemma-a meta-analysis and review. J Urol 2008; 179: 1227-34
20. O'Connor KM, Davis N, Lennon GM, et al,. Can we avoid surgery in elderly patients with renal masses by using the Charlson comorbidity index? BJU Int 2009; 103: 1492-5
21. Mattar K, Jewett MA,. Watchful waiting for small renal masses. Curr Urol Rep 2008; 9: 22-5
22. Maturen KE, Nghiem HV, Caoili EM, et al,. Renal mass core biopsy: accuracy and impact on clinical management. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007; 188: 563-70 (Pubitemid 46167760)
23. Dechet CB, Bostwick DG, Blute ML, et al,. Renal oncocytoma: multifocality, bilateralism, metachronous tumor development and coexistent renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 1999; 162: 40-2 (Pubitemid 29420875)
24. Sofikerim M, Tatlisen A, Canoz O, et al,. What is the role of percutaneous needle core biopsy in diagnosis of renal masses? Urology 2010; 76: 614-18
25. Jaff A, Molinie V, Mellot F, et al,. Evaluation of imaging-guided fine-needle percutaneous biopsy of renal masses. Eur Radiol 2005; 15: 1721-6 (Pubitemid 41102370)
26. Dechet CB, Zincke H, Sebo TJ, et al,. Prospective analysis of computerized tomography and needle biopsy with permanent sectioning to determine the nature of solid renal masses in adults. J Urol 2003; 169: 71-4 (Pubitemid 35461553)
27. Lechevallier E, Andre M, Barriol D, et al,. Fine-needle percutaneous biopsy of renal masses with helical CT guidance. Radiology 2000; 216: 506-10 (Pubitemid 30599874)
28. Lechevallier E,. Editorial comment on: ultrasound-guided biopsy of homogeneous solid renal masses. Eur Urol 2007; 52: 1426-7 (Pubitemid 47445972)
29. Li G, Cuilleron M, Cottier M, et al,. Results of fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) in the diagnosis of indeterminate solid renal tumours. Prog Urol 2010; 20: 30-4
30. Shannon BA, Cohen RJ, de Bruto H, et al,. The value of preoperative needle core biopsy for diagnosing benign lesions among small, incidentally detected renal masses. J Urol 2008; 180: 1257-61
31. Volpe A, Kachura JR, Geddie WR, et al,. Techniques, safety and accuracy of sampling of renal tumors by fine needle aspiration and core biopsy. J Urol 2007; 178: 379-86 (Pubitemid 47030509)
32. Schmidbauer J, Remzi M, Memarsadeghi M, et al,. Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography-guided percutaneous biopsy of renal masses. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 1003-11
33. Somani BK, Nabi G, Thorpe P, et al,. Image-guided biopsy-diagnosed renal cell carcinoma: critical appraisal of technique and long-term follow-up. Eur Urol 2007; 51: 1289-95
34. Vasudevan A, Davies RJ, Shannon BA, et al,. Incidental renal tumours: the frequency of benign lesions and the role of preoperative core biopsy. BJU Int 2006; 97: 946-9
35. Wunderlich H, Hindermann W, Al Mustafa AM, et al,. The accuracy of 250 fine needle biopsies of renal tumors. J Urol 2005; 174: 44-6 (Pubitemid 40825667)
36. Neuzillet Y, Lechevallier E, Andre M, et al,. Accuracy and clinical role of fine needle percutaneous biopsy with computerized tomography guidance of small (less than 4.0 cm) renal masses. J Urol 2004; 171: 1802-5 (Pubitemid 38501006)
37. Brierly RD, Thomas PJ, Harrison NW, et al,. Evaluation of fine-needle aspiration cytology for renal masses. BJU Int 2000; 85: 14-8 (Pubitemid 30072441)
38. Eshed I, Elias S, Sidi AA,. Diagnostic value of CT-guided biopsy of indeterminate renal masses. Clin Radiol 2004; 59: 262-7 (Pubitemid 38268127)
39. Lane BR, Samplaski MK, Herts BR, et al,. Renal mass biopsy: a renaissance? J Urol 2008; 179: 20-7
40. Rybicki FJ, Shu KM, Cibas ES, et al,. Percutaneous biopsy of renal masses: sensitivity and negative predictive value stratified by clinical setting and size of masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180: 1281-7 (Pubitemid 36504615)
41. Herts BR, Baker ME,. The current role of percutaneous biopsy in the evaluation of renal masses. Semin Urol Oncol 1995; 13: 254-61
42. Breda A, Treat EG, Haft-Candell L, et al,. Comparison of accuracy of 14-, 18- and 20-G needles in ex vivo renal mass biopsy: a prospective, blinded study. BJU Int 2010; 105: 940-5
43. Wang R, Wolf JS Jr, Wood DP Jr, et al,. Accuracy of percutaneous core biopsy in management of small renal masses. Urology 2009; 73: 586-91
44. Lane BR, Babineau D, Kattan MW, et al,. A preoperative prognostic nomogram for solid enhancing renal tumors 7 cm or less amenable to partial nephrectomy. J Urol 2007; 178: 429-34 (Pubitemid 47030487)
45. Barocas DA, Mathew S, DelPizzo JJ, et al,. Renal cell carcinoma subtyping by histopathology and fluorescence in situ hybridization on a needle-biopsy specimen. BJU Int 2007; 99: 290-5 (Pubitemid 46103106)
46. Jones J, Libermann TA,. Genomics of renal cell cancer: the biology behind and the therapy ahead. Clin Cancer Res 2007; 13: 685s-92s