Small renal masses: Toward more rational treatment
ABSTRACTManaging small renal masses poses a common and controversial problem. Although radical nephrectomy is still the most common treatment, partial nephrectomy is the new gold standard, and thermal ablation or active surveillance are reasonable for some patients. Renal mass biopsy with molecular profiling will likely allow for more rational treatment in the near future.
KEY POINTS
- Small renal masses are a heterogeneous group of tumors, and only 20% are aggressive renal cell carcinoma.
- In general, nephron-sparing treatments are preferred to avoid chronic kidney disease, which often occurs after radical nephrectomy.
- Thermal ablation and active surveillance are valid treatment strategies in select patients who are not optimal surgical candidates or who have limited life expectancy.
Opinion about treatment of mall renal masses has changed considerably in the past 2 decades.
Traditionally, the most common treatment was surgical removal of the whole kidney, ie, radical nephrectomy. However, recent studies have shown that many patients who undergo radical nephrectomy develop chronic kidney disease. Furthermore, radical nephrectomy often constitutes over-treatment, as many of these lesions are benign or, if malignant, would follow an indolent course if left alone.
Now that we better understand the biology of small renal masses and are more aware of the morbidity and mortality related to chronic kidney disease, we try to avoid radical nephrectomy whenever possible, favoring nephron-sparing approaches instead.
In this article, we review the current clinical management of small renal masses.
SMALL RENAL MASSES ARE A HETEROGENEOUS GROUP
Small renal masses are defined as solid renal tumors that enhance on computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and are suspected of being renal cell carcinomas. They are generally low-stage and relatively small (< 4 cm in diameter) at presentation. Most are now discovered incidentally on CT or MRI done for various abdominal symptoms. From 20,000 to 30,000 new cases are diagnosed each year in the United States, and the rate is increasing by 3% to 4% per year as the use of CT and MRI increases.1,2
With more small renal masses being detected incidentally, renal cell carcinoma has been going through a stage and size migration—ie, more of these tumors are being discovered in clinical stage T1 (ie, confined to the kidney and measuring less than 7 cm) than in the past. Currently, clinical T1 renal tumors account for 48% to 66% of cases.3
This indicates that the disease is being detected and treated earlier in its course than in the past. However, cancer-specific deaths from renal cell carcinoma have not declined, suggesting that for many of these patients, our traditional practice of aggressive surgical management with radical nephrectomy may not be warranted.4
Small renal masses vary in biologic aggressiveness
Recent large surgical series indicate that up to 20% of small renal masses are benign, 55% to 60% are indolent renal cell carcinomas, and only 20% to 25% have potentially aggressive features, defined by high nuclear grade or locally invasive characteristics.5–7
A relatively strong predictor of the aggressiveness of renal tumors is their size, which directly correlates with the risk of malignant pathology. Of lesions smaller than 1.0 cm, 38% to 46% are benign, dramatically decreasing to 6.3% to 7.1% for lesions larger than 7.0 cm.5 Each 1.0-cm increase in tumor diameter correlates with a 16% increase in the risk of malignancy.8
Our knowledge of the natural history of small renal masses is limited, being based on small, retrospective series. In these studies, when small renal masses were followed over time, relatively few progressed (ie, metastasized), and there have been no documented reports of disease progression in the absence of demonstrable tumor growth, suggesting a predominance of nonaggressive phenotypes.9
In light of these observations, patients with small renal masses should be carefully evaluated to determine if they are candidates for active surveillance as opposed to more aggressive treatment, ie, surgery or thermal ablation.
CT AND MRI ARE THE PREFERRED DIAGNOSTIC STUDIES
In the past, most patients with renal tumors presented with gross hematuria, flank pain, or a palpable abdominal mass. These presentations are now uncommon, as most cases are asymptomatic and are diagnosed incidentally. In a series of 349 small renal masses, microhematuria was found in only 8 cases.10
Systemic manifestations or paraneoplastic syndromes such as hypercalcemia or hypertension are more common in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma than in those with localized tumors. It was because of these varied clinical presentations that renal cell carcinoma was previously known as the “internist’s tumor”; however, small renal masses are better termed the “radiologist’s tumor.”11
High-quality axial imaging with CT or MRI is preferred for evaluating renal cortical neoplasms. Enhancement on CT or MRI is the characteristic finding of a renal lesion that should be suspected of being renal cell carcinoma (Figure 1). Triple-phase CT is ideal, with images taken before contrast is given, immediately after contrast (the early vascular phase), and later (the delayed phase). Alternatively, MRI can be used in patients who are allergic to intravenous contrast or who have moderate renal dysfunction.
Renal tumors with enhancement of more than 15 Hounsfield units (HU) on CT imaging are considered suggestive of renal cell carcinoma, whereas those with less than 10 HU of enhancement are more likely to be benign. Enhancement in the range of 10 to 15 HU is considered equivocal.
Differential diagnosis
By far, most small renal masses are renal cell carcinomas. However, other possibilities include oncocytoma, atypical or fat-poor angiomyolipoma, metanephric adenoma, urothelial carcinoma, metastatic lesions, lymphoma, renal abscess or infarction, mixed epithelial or stromal tumor, pseudotumor, and vascular malformations.
With rare exceptions, dense fat within a renal mass reliably indicates benign angiomyolipoma, and all renal tumors should be reviewed carefully for this feature. Beyond this, no clinical or radiologic feature ensures that a small renal mass is benign.
Imaging’s inability to accurately classify these enhancing renal lesions has led to a renewed interest in renal mass sampling to aid in the evaluation of small renal masses.
