| Abstract: | The authors have evaluated 22 patients with renal pelvis tumour (RPT) by means of excretory urography and ultrasonography. Six patients also underwent arteriography. The value of the three investigations in the diagnosis of the lesion, the nature, the pyelic origin and the extension are presented. It is concluded that urography remains the method of choice for the evaluation of RPT while ultrasonography may be considered complementary to urography in cases of non-functioning kidney, when the urographic filling device defect is uncertain and in the differentiation between the pyelic or parenchymal origin of the tumour. |
