Update on <scp>MRI</scp> of Cystic Renal Masses Including Bosniak Version 2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Incidental cystic renal masses are common, usually benign, and almost always indolent. Since 1986, the Bosniak classification has been used to express the risk of malignancy in a cystic renal mass detected at imaging. Historically, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was not included in that classification. The proposed Bosniak v.2019 update has formally incorporated MRI, included definitions of imaging terms designed to improve interobserver agreement and specificity for malignancy, and incorporated a variety of masses that were incompletely defined or not included in the original classification. For example, at unenhanced MRI, homogeneous masses markedly hyperintense at T 2 ‐weighted imaging (similar to cerebrospinal fluid) and homogeneous masses markedly hyperintense at fat suppressed T 1 ‐weighted imaging (approximately ≥2.5 times more intense than adjacent renal parenchyma) are classified as Bosniak II and may be safely ignored, even when they have not been imaged with a complete renal mass MRI protocol. MRI has specific advantages and is recommended to evaluate masses that at computed tomography (CT) 1) have abundant thick or nodular calcifications; 2) are homogeneous, hyperattenuating, ≥3 cm, and nonenhancing; or 3) are heterogeneous and nonenhancing. Although MRI is generally excellent for characterizing cystic renal masses, there are unique weaknesses of MRI that bear consideration. These details and others related to MRI of cystic renal masses are described in this review, with an emphasis on Bosniak v.2019. A website ( https://bosniak-calculator.herokuapp.com/ ) and mobile phone apps named “Bosniak Calculator” have been developed for ease of assignment of Bosniak classes. Level of Evidence 5 Technical Efficacy Stage 3
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".