{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.033700583279325985, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013609850939727802, 'mean_word_length': 4.915708812260537, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[A possible role of magnetic resonance in the follow-up of renal transplants].

The authors discuss the possible role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) in the follow-up of renal transplants. Its diagnostic accuracy is compared with Ultrasounds (US), which is considered the method of choice in postoperative monitoring of renal transplants. Thirty-two patients (transplant life ranging from 5 days to 37 months) were examined in the same day with both MRI and US. Sonographic evaluation is based on a group of signs related to renal alterations and unanimously ascertained; the identification of MR patterns of normally functioning kidney or renal rejection might give way to more extensive clinical applications of the method, with the advantages of multiplanarity and no X-ray use. MR diagnostic accuracy in the diagnosis of normally functioning transplant or renal rejection was 82.7% (vs. US: 68.9%); even though specificity was the same (84.6%). MRI had higher sensibility than US (82.25% vs. 656.25%). MRI is more sensitive in demonstrating renal pathology in transplanted kidneys, and its diagnostic accuracy is superior. Still, US must be considered the methodology of choice in instrumental research when there is a clinical suspicion of renal rejection, due to its sufficient diagnostic accuracy, to its being easy to perform in continuous follow-up, to its low cost and to the short execution time. MRI is nevertheless suggested in the follow-up of renal transplants both in questionable cases and when biopsy cannot be performed.