Skip to main content

Renal Mass Biopsy

  • Chapter
Interventional Urology

Abstract

Over the past several years, the indication for renal mass biopsy has greatly expanded, and its use has increasingly proven to play an important role in management decisions. CT, US, and MRI imaging have all been used for guidance to obtain renal mass biopsies and have been proven to be safe and effective. The goal of this chapter is to review methodology, safety, complications, reliability, and current and expanding and indications for renal mass biopsy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Chow WH, Devesa SS, Warren JL, Fraumeni Jr JF. Rising incidence of renal cell cancer in the United States. JAMA. 1999;281:1628–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hollingsworth JM, Miller DC, Daignault S, Hollenbeck BK. Rising incidence of small renal masses: a need to reassess treatment effect. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:1331–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Halverson SJ, Kunju LP, Bhalla R, et al. Accuracy of determining small renal mass management with risk stratified biopsies: confirmation by final pathology. J Urol. 2013;189:441–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Campbell SC, Novick AC, Belldegrun A, et al. Guideline for management of the clinical T1 renal mass. J Urol. 2009;182:1271–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Israel GM, Hindman N, Bosniak MA. Evaluation of cystic renal masses: comparison of CT and MR imaging by using the Bosniak classification system. Radiology. 2004;231:365–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pedrosa I, Chou MT, Ngo L, et al. MR classification of renal masses with pathologic correlation. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:365–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Frank I, Blute ML, Cheville JC, Lohse CM, Weaver AL, Zincke H. Solid renal tumors: an analysis of pathological features related to tumor size. J Urol. 2003;170:2217–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Shuch B, Hanley JM, Lai JC, et al. Adverse health outcomes associated with surgical management of the small renal mass. J Urol. 2014;191:301–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Volpe A, Finelli A, Gill IS, et al. Rationale for percutaneous biopsy and histologic characterisation of renal tumours. Eur Urol. 2012;62:491–504.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lane BR, Samplaski MK, Herts BR, Zhou M, Novick AC, Campbell SC. Renal mass biopsy--a renaissance? J Urol. 2008;179:20–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Leveridge MJ, Finelli A, Kachura JR, et al. Outcomes of small renal mass needle core biopsy, nondiagnostic percutaneous biopsy, and the role of repeat biopsy. Eur Urol. 2011;60:578–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lechevallier E, Andre M, Barriol D, et al. Fine-needle percutaneous biopsy of renal masses with helical CT guidance. Radiology. 2000;216:506–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Renshaw AA, Granter SR. Metastatic, sarcomatoid, and PSA- and PAP-negative prostatic carcinoma: diagnosis by fine-needle aspiration. Diagn Cytopathol. 2000;23:199–201.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Neuzillet Y, Lechevallier E, Andre M, Daniel L, Coulange C. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Choyke PL, White EM, Zeman RK, Jaffe MH, Clark LR. Renal metastases: clinicopathologic and radiologic correlation. Radiology. 1987;162:359–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Corapi KM, Chen JL, Balk EM, Gordon CE. Bleeding complications of native kidney biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Kidney Dis Off J Natl Kidney Found. 2012;60:62–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gazelle GS, Haaga JR, Rowland DY. Effect of needle gauge, level of anticoagulation, and target organ on bleeding associated with aspiration biopsy. Work in progress. Radiology. 1992;183:509–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Whittier WL, Korbet SM. Timing of complications in percutaneous renal biopsy. J Am Soc Nephrol JASN. 2004;15:142–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Marwah DS, Korbet SM. Timing of complications in percutaneous renal biopsy: what is the optimal period of observation? Am J Kidney Dis Off J Natl Kidney Found. 1996;28:47–52.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Herts BR, Baker ME. The current role of percutaneous biopsy in the evaluation of renal masses. Semin Urol Oncol. 1995;13:254–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Huang GT, Sheu JC, Yang PM, Lee HS, Wang TH, Chen DS. Ultrasound-guided cutting biopsy for the diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma--a study based on 420 patients. J Hepatol. 1996;25:334–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mullins JK, Rodriguez R. Renal cell carcinoma seeding of a percutaneous biopsy tract. Can Urol Assoc J Journal de l’Association des urologues du Canada. 2013;7:E176–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Silverman SG, Gan YU, Mortele KJ, Tuncali K, Cibas ES. Renal masses in the adult patient: the role of percutaneous biopsy. Radiology. 2006;240:6–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Huang SY, Ahrar K, Gupta S, et al. Safety and diagnostic accuracy of percutaneous biopsy in upper tract urothelial carcinoma. BJU Int. 2015;115(4):625–32.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hopper KD, Yakes WF. The posterior intercostal approach for percutaneous renal procedures: risk of puncturing the lung, spleen, and liver as determined by CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1990;154:115–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Picus D, Weyman PJ, Clayman RV, McClennan BL. Intercostal-space nephrostomy for percutaneous stone removal. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1986;147:393–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Scanga LR, Maygarden SJ. Utility of fine-needle aspiration and core biopsy with touch preparation in the diagnosis of renal lesions. Cancer Cytopathol. 2014;122:182–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brian Shuch MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Agochukwu, N., Shuch, B. (2016). Renal Mass Biopsy. In: Rastinehad, A., Siegel, D., Pinto, P., Wood, B. (eds) Interventional Urology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23464-9_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23464-9_18

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-23463-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-23464-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics