Classifying a cystic renal mass (Bosniak 2019)

CT · MRI · USG

First and second year — the floor first, then every step

Only a renal-mass protocol CT or MRI can apply Bosniak 2019: count and measure septa and walls, look for enhancement in HU (CT) or visually/subtraction (MRI), and find any enhancing nodule — its shape decides class IV.

Orient first

  • Bosniak 2019 is defined on CT and MRI, not ultrasound; ultrasound can call a simple cyst (and CEUS is used in some centres), but a complex cyst needs a protocol study.
  • MRI and ultrasound have no equivalent of the CT rule: on CT, enhancement is a rise of 20 HU or more between unenhanced and enhanced phases; 10–19 HU is equivocal (pseudo-enhancement, especially in small lesions).
  • The 2019 revision added quantitative wall/septum thickness (≤ 2, 3, ≥ 4 mm) and defined a nodule by its shape (obtuse ≥ 4 mm or acute any size) — verify against the version in use.

Acquire the study

  • Unenhanced and nephrographic phase (about 90–100 s) thin-slice CT.

The manoeuvre

  • Unenhanced attenuation of the fluid (homogeneous −9 to 20 HU = simple fluid; ≥ 70 HU homogeneous = hyperdense cyst class II).
  • Enhancement: ROI in the same place on both phases; ≥ 20 HU rise = enhancing.
  • Count septa and measure wall and septal thickness in mm.
  • Nodules: a focal protrusion of the wall/septum — obtuse margins ≥ 4 mm or acute margins any size = class IV.

What confirms it

  • A Bosniak 2019 class based on a protocol CT or MRI.

What licenses you to exclude it

  • A simple cyst by strict criteria needs no follow-up.

The classic misread

  • Calling pseudo-enhancement in a small cyst next to enhancing parenchyma real.

Reference values

Each value carries the caveat that keeps it from being misused. Normal limits and diagnostic criteria are kept apart on purpose: a disease cut-off read as a normal range is the more dangerous mistake.

Normal limits

  • Renal cyst (simple) · Simple-cyst features (Bosniak I)

    anechoic, imperceptible wall, posterior enhancement on US; water attenuation and no enhancement on CT/MRI — Bosniak I, leave alone

    A "simple cyst" verdict requires ALL the simple features. Thin-section, an adequate ROI, and no enhancement — a 1 cm high-attenuation cyst is not simple (it is a Bosniak IIF/II conversation). Versioned criterion — verify against the current edition before clinical use.

    USG · CT · MRI

Diagnostic criteria

  • Renal cyst (Bosniak 2019 classes) · Bosniak 2019 classes I–IV — what each class is

    I = simple (hairline wall, no septa, no enhancement). II = few hairline septa or fine calcification, or a homogeneously hyperdense cyst ≤3 cm, no measurable enhancement. IIF = more septa, perceived (not measurable) enhancement, thick/nodular Ca, or a hyperdense cyst >3 cm — follow-up class. III = thickened irregular or smooth walls/septa with measurable enhancement — surgical conversation. IV = enhancing nodular soft tissue. Read septal-thickness and protrusion rules from the current 2019 table; do not invent a millimetre from the old edition. The already-registered uro-bosniak entry is the parent how-to-report row

    Version 2019 redefined several boundaries and formally extended the system to MRI. Name the version. Versioned criterion — verify against the current edition before clinical use.

    CT · MRI

  • Renal cyst · Bosniak I–IV (2019 class map)

    I = simple (hairline wall, no septa, no enhancement). II = few hairline septa or fine Ca, or a homogeneously hyperdense cyst ≤3 cm, no measurable enhancement. IIF = more septa, perceived (not measurable) enhancement, thick/nodular Ca, or a hyperdense cyst >3 cm — follow-up class. III = thickened walls/septa with measurable enhancement. IV = enhancing nodular soft tissue. Same map as the already-registered exp12-uro-bosniak-2019 row — figures must not drift

    Version 2019 redefined several boundaries against the original classification and formally extended it to MRI — name the version in the report, and read the septal-thickness definitions from the current table rather than from memory. Versioned criterion — verify against the current edition before clinical use.

    CT · MRI

See it on real cases

Direct links to Radiopaedia — the reference article and worked cases with their images. Each opens on Radiopaedia.

Key papers

Reviews and guidelines from RSNA, ESR and related journals. Each opens at its DOI.

  1. Bosniak Classification of Cystic Renal Masses, Version 2019: An Update Proposal and Needs Assessment ↗Silverman SG, Pedrosa I, Ellis JH, et al. · Radiology 2019RSNA · PubMed
  2. Bosniak Classification of Cystic Renal Masses, Version 2019: A Pictorial Guide to Clinical Use ↗Schieda N, Davenport MS, Krishna S, et al. · RadioGraphics 2021RSNA · PubMed
  3. Bosniak classification of cystic renal masses, version 2019: interpretation pitfalls and recommendations to avoid misclassification ↗Edney E, Davenport MS, Curci N, et al. · Abdominal Radiology 2021SAR · PubMed
  4. Proportion of malignancy in Bosniak classification of cystic renal masses version 2019 (v2019) classes: systematic review and meta-analysis ↗McGrath TA, Bai X, Kamaya A, et al. · European Radiology 2023ESR · PubMed

More searches

More in Abdomen and pelvis