Advertisement

Pediatric Radiology

, Volume 44, Issue 4, pp 484–487 | Cite as

Cortical necrosis secondary to trauma in a child: contrast-enhanced ultrasound comparable to magnetic resonance imaging

  • Gibran T. Yusuf
  • Maria E. Sellars
  • Dean Y. Huang
  • Annamaria Deganello
  • Paul S. SidhuEmail author
Case Report

Abstract

Cortical necrosis is an uncommon cause of renal impairment and is rarely a consequence of blunt abdominal trauma. We present a case of unilateral traumatic acute cortical necrosis in a child demonstrated on contrast-enhanced US with confirmation on MRI. Contrast-enhanced US provides a rapid, accurate evaluation of renal parenchyma abnormalities in blunt abdominal trauma in children without exposure to ionising radiation or the risk of sedation.

Keywords

Cortical necrosis Trauma Paediatric Contrast-enhanced ultrasound Magnetic resonance imaging 

Notes

Conflict of interest

Maria E. Sellars, Annamaria Deganello, and Paul S. Sidhu have, all in the past received, lecture fees from Bracco SpA the manufacturer of the contrast media used for the present case.

Gibran T. Yusuf and Dean Y. Huang have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

247_2013_2818_MOESM1_ESM.avi (179.4 mb)
ESM 1 (AVI 183754 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Prakash J, Vohra R, Wani IA et al (2007) Decreasing incidence of renal cortical necrosis in patients with acute renal failure in developing countries: a single-centre experience of 22 years from eastern India. Nephrol Dial Transplant 22:1213–1217PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goergen T, Lindstrom RR, Tan H et al (1981) CT appearance of acute renal cortical necrosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 137:176–177PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jeong JY, Sim JS, Lee HJ et al (2002) MR findings of renal cortical necrosis. J Comput Assist Tomogr 26:232–236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fernandez CP, Ripolles T, Martinez MJ et al (2013) Diagnosis of acute cortical necrosis in renal transplantation by contrast-enhanced ultrasound: a preliminary experience. Ultraschall in Med 34:338–342Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Piscaglia F, Nolsoe C, Dietrich CF et al (2012) The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical practice of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. Ultraschall in Med 32:33–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sidhu PS, Choi BI, Bachmann-Nielsen M (2012) The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical practice of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): a new dawn for the escalating use of this ubiquitous technique. Ultraschall in Med 32:5–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Riccabona M (2012) Application of a second-generation US contrast agent in infants and children – a European questionnaire-based survey. Pediatr Radiol 42:1471–1480PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Piskunowicz P, Kosiak W, Batko T (2012) Intravenous application of second-generation ultrasound contrast agents in children: a review of the literature. Ultraschall in Med 33:135–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gibran T. Yusuf
    • 1
  • Maria E. Sellars
    • 1
  • Dean Y. Huang
    • 1
  • Annamaria Deganello
    • 1
  • Paul S. Sidhu
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.King’s College London, Department of RadiologyKing’s College HospitalLondonUK

Personalised recommendations