Application of three-dimensional Superb micro-vascular imaging (3D-SMI) combined with quantitative blood flow analysis in the noninvasive diagnosis of renal tumors
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the diagnostic value of three-dimensional superb micro-vascular imaging (3D-SMI) combined with quantitative analysis of Area and VI in differentiating benign and malignant renal tumors.
Methods: A total of 256 renal lesions from 254 patients who underwent gray-scale ultrasound (Gray US), twodimensional superb micro-vascular imaging (2D-SMI), and 3D-SMI examinations at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital between January 2022 and June 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. The imaging features on Gray US, 2D-SMI and 3D-SMI were recorded. Based on 3D-SMI, Vascular Architecture were classified into five types:
Type I (avascular), Type II (spotty flow), Type III (sparse flow), Type IV (encircling), and Type V (rich flow). The plane with the most abundant blood flow was selected, and the Area and VI were calculated using Image Pro Plus (IPP) software. Histopathology from surgery or biopsy served as the reference standard. The differences in Vascular Architecture, Area, and VI between benign and malignant renal tumors were compared, and their diagnostic performance was evaluated.
Results: Among the 256 lesions, 70 were benign and 186 were malignant. The interobserver agreement for Vascular Architecture classification was good (Kappa = 0.803), and the consistency for Area and VI was high (ICC = 0.835 and 0.864, respectively). Benign tumors Vascular Architecture were mainly type II or III, with mean Area and VI values of 945.87 ± 568.26 (range: 68–3125) and 5.93 ± 4.95 (range: 0.23–24.73), respectively. Malignant tumors were predominantly type IV or V, with mean Area and VI values of 3694.53 ± 2612.38 (range: 93–9965) and 18.21 ± 10.83 (range: 0.69–48.13), respectively. Significant differences were observed in Vascular Architecture, Area, and VI between benign and malignant lesions (all P < 0.001). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) values for 3D-SMI Vascular Architecture, Area, VI, 2D-SMI, and Gray US were 0.813, 0.807, 0.859, 0.750, and 0.718, respectively. VI demonstrated the highest diagnostic performance, with a cutoff value of 8.19 (sensitivity: 82.26%; specificity: 85.51%). Among benign subtypes, there were no significant differences in Vascular Architecture or Area (P > 0.05), while the VI of oncocytoma was significantly higher than epithelioid angiomyolipoma (EMAL), metanephric adenomas (MA), and angiomyolipoma (AML)(P < 0.01). Among malignant subtypes, clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) showed distinct Vascular Architecture compared with papillary renal cell carcinoma(pRCC), chromophobe renal cell carcinoma(chRCC), and Xp11.2 translocation/TFE3 fusion-associated renal cell carcinoma(tRCC) (P < 0.01). The Area and VI of ccRCC were significantly higher than those of pRCC and chRCC (P < 0.05), but not significantly different from tRCC (P > 0.05).
Conclusion: 3D-SMI provides three-dimensional visualization of Vascular Architecture. Quantitative analysis of the most vascularized plane using Area and VI differentiation between benign and malignant renal tumors, with VI demonstrating the best diagnostic efficacy. This technique offers a non-invasive diagnostic approach for renal tumors.
References
1. Galia M, Albano D, Bruno A et al (2017) Imaging features of solid renal masses[J]. Br J Radiol 90(1077):20170077
2. Johnson JDC, Vukina J, Smith AB et al (2015) Misdiagnosis of small renal masses: A systematic review. J Urol 193(1):30–35
3. Schieda N, Krishna S, Pedrosa I et al (2022) Active surveillance of renal masses: the role of radiology. Radiology 302(1):11–24
4. Wei SP, Xu CL, Zhang Q et al (2017) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for differentiating benign from malignant solid small renal masses: comparison with contrast-enhanced CT[J]. Abdom Radiol 42(8):2135–2145
5. Lerchbaumer MH, Putz FJ, Rübenthaler J et al (2020) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) of cystic renal lesions in comparison to CT and MRI in a multicenter setting[J]. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 75(4):419–429
6. Gulati M, King KG, Gill IS et al (2015) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) of cystic and solid renal lesions: a review[J]. Abdom Imaging 40(6):1982–1996
7. Srivastava S, Dhyani M, Dighe M (2024) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): applications from the kidneys to the bladder[J]. Abdom Radiol 49(11):4092–4112
8. Li X, Nie P, Zhang J et al (2022) Differential diagnosis of renal oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma using CT features: a central scar-matched retrospective study[J]. Acta Radiol 63(2):253–260
9. Laothamatas I, Al Mubarak H, Reddy A et al (2023) Multiparametric MRI of solid renal masses: principles and applications of advanced quantitative and functional methods for tumor diagnosis and characterization. J Magn Reson Imaging 58(2):342–359
10. Katayama Y, Uchino J, Chihara Y et al (2019) Tumor neovascularization and developments in therapeutics[J]. Cancers 11(3):316
11. Li C, Huang BJ, He WY et al (2011) Pilot study of three-dimensional contrastenhanced ultrasound in vascular patterns of renal tumors[J]. Chin J Ultrasonogr 20(5):393–396
12. Cai S, Wang H, Zhang X et al (2021) Superb microvascular imaging technology can improve the diagnostic efficiency of the BI-RADS system[J]. Front Oncol 11:634752
13. Ji J, Tang E, Wang Y et al (2025) The clinical application of Superb microvascular imaging in evaluating thyroid related diseases: A systematic Review[J]. J Clin Ultrasound 53(2):336–342
14. Yang F, Zhao J, Liu C et al (2019) Superb microvascular imaging technique in depicting vascularity in focal liver lesions: more hypervascular supply patterns were depicted in hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Cancer Imaging 19(1):92
15. Zhang D, Mu J, Mao YR et al (2021) Application value of Superb microvascular imaging for diagnosis of different size renal solid tumors[J]. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi Chin J Oncol 43(11):1215–1221
16. Mu J, Mao Y, Li F et al (2019) Superb microvascular imaging is a rational choice for accurate Bosniak classification of renal cystic masses[J]. Br J Radiol 92(1099):20181038
17. Mao Y, Mu J, Zhao J et al (2022) The comparative study of color doppler flow imaging, Superb microvascular imaging, contrast-enhanced ultrasound micro flow imaging in blood flow analysis of solid renal mass[J]. Cancer Imaging 22(1):21
18. Zhang XY, Zhang L, Li N et al (2019) Vascular index measured by smart 3-D Superb microvascular imaging can help to differentiate malignant and benign breast lesion. Cancer Manage Res 11:5481–5487
19. Li WW, Zhou QH, Wu Y et al (2019) Application of smart Three-dimensional Superb microvascular imaging technique in breast lesion Evaluation[J]. Chinses J Ultrasound Med 35(7):587–589
20. Adler DD, Carson PL, Rubin JM, Quinn-Reid D (1990) Doppler ultrasound color flow imaging in the study of breast cancer: preliminary findings. Ultrasound Med Biol 16(6):553–559
21. Zang AH, Wang ZB, Wang HQ et al (2011) Evaluation of three-dimensional color doppler flow imaging in classification of the renal cell carcinoma with vascular characteristics[J]. Chin J Med Ultrasound(Electronic Edition) 8(3):498–504
22. Folkman J (1976) The vascularization of tumors[J]. Sci Am 234(5):58–73
23. Carmeliet P, Jain RK (2000) Angiogenesis in cancer and other diseases[J]. Nature 407(6801):249–257
24. Maniotis AJ, Folberg R, Hess A et al (1999) Vascular channel formation by human melanoma cells in vivo and in vitro:vasculogenic mimicry[J]. Am J Pathol 155(3):739–752
25. Li C, Qi L, Geng C et al (2025) Comparative diagnostic performance of color doppler flow imaging, microflow imaging and Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in solid renal Tumors[J]. Acad Radiol 32:3475–3484
26. Kono T, Kazutoshi F, Gen N (2017) Superb Micro-Vascular imaging (SMI): clinical advantages of a novel Us flow technique in pediatric diagnostic imaging[J]. AOSPR 4:18–23
27. Van Oostenbrugge TJ, Fütterer JJ, Mulders PF (2018) A. Diagnostic imaging for solid renal tumors: a pictorial review[J]. Kidney Cancer 2(2):79–93
28. Kim M, Sohn M, Shim M et al (2017) Prognostic value of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), VEGF receptor 2, platelet-derived growth factor-β (PDGF-β), and PDGF-β receptor expression in papillary renal cell carcinoma[J]. Hum Pathol 61:78–89
29. Zheng R, Li F, Li F et al (2021) Targeting tumor vascularization: promising strategies for vascular normalization[J]. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 147(9):2489–2505
30. Shimizu T, Miyake M, Iida K et al (2024) Molecular mechanism of formation and destruction of a pseudo-capsule in clear cell renal cell carcinoma[J]. Oncol Lett 27(5):225
31. Chen M, Fu X, Shen Y (2021) Evaluation of multimode color doppler flow imaging in the diagnosis of solid renal tumor[J], vol 2021. Contrast Media & Molecular Imaging, p 6656877. 1
32. Mao Y, Mu J, Zhao J et al (2018) The value of Superb microvascular imaging in differentiating benign renal mass from malignant renal tumor: a retrospective study[J]. Br J Radiol 91(1082):20170601
33. Mao YR, Xia TT, Wang HL (2024) Evaluation of image-pro plus assisted Superb microvascular imaging for differential diagnosis of renal masses. Urol Oncol 42(9):292 .e9-292.e16
34. Shi LH, Li J, Meng QT et al (2021) Clinical features and MSCT diagnostic value of patients with different pathological subtypes of renal cell carcinoma[J]. Chinses J CT MRI 19(12):115–118
35. Muglia VF, Prando A (2015) Histological and imaging features of renal cell carcinoma subtypes. Radiol Bras 48(3):166–174
36. Prasad SR, Humphrey PA, Catena JR et al (2006) Common and uncommon histologic subtypes of renal cell carcinoma: imaging spectrum with pathologic correlation[J]. Radiographics 26(6):1795–1806
37. Schwarze V, Marschner C, Negrão de Figueiredo G et al (2020) Single-center study: the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) for assessing renal oncocytoma[J]. Scandinavian J Urol 54(2):135–140
38. Zheng WX, Xiao H, Lan LM et al Differentiation of renal oncocytoma and renal cell clear carcinoma based on enhancement patter of MDCT[J]. Chinses J CT MRI 2024, 22(12):121–123
39. Licht MR, Novick AC, Tubbs RR et al (1993) Renal oncocytoma: clinical and biological correlates[J]. J Urol 150(5):1380–1383
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Yiran Mao, Chunyang Yu, Tianqi Wang, Fangxuan Li, Wenjing Hou, Xi Wei, Jie Mu (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Transfer of Copyright and Permission to Reproduce Parts of Published Papers.
Authors retain the copyright for their published work. No formal permission will be required to reproduce parts (tables or illustrations) of published papers, provided the source is quoted appropriately and reproduction has no commercial intent. Reproductions with commercial intent will require written permission and payment of royalties.
