Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 265

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Normal Values for Renal Length and Volume as Measured by Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Cheong, Benjamin, Muthupillai, Raja, Rubin, Mario F., Flamm, Scott D.·2007·Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology

Abstract

The objective of this magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) study was to (1) test the validity of the ellipsoid formula for estimating kidney volume using ex vivo and in vivo models and (2) establish a normal range of values for kidney length and volume in patients with no known history of renal disease. The volumes of five excised porcine kidneys were measured by (1) disc-summation method, (2) ellipsoid formula, and (3) water displacement method. In a retrospective, consecutive group of clinically referred patients (n = 150; 300 kidneys), individual kidney volume and length were calculated by the disc-summation method and by multiplanar reformation of MRI data, respectively. For comparison, kidney volumes also were calculated using the ellipsoid formula in all patients. Renal volume that was obtained by MRI using the disc-summation method was within 5% of the volume that was determined by the water displacement method, independent of the spatial resolution of the MRI technique used. Data from both the in vivo and the ex vivo models revealed that the ellipsoid formula that commonly is used in ultrasonography underestimates renal volume by 17 to 29% compared with the disc-summation method (P < 0.05). As measured by MRI (mean +/- SD), kidney lengths were 12.4 +/- 0.9 cm for men and 11.6 +/- 1.1 cm for women, and kidney volumes were 202 +/- 36 ml for men and 154 +/- 33 ml for women. The results from the ex vivo MRI study show that the kidney volume that was obtained using the disc-summation method is within 5% of the true kidney volume as measured by the water displacement method. The ellipsoid formula consistently and significantly underestimates the true kidney volume. The length and the volume of kidneys that are obtained by MRI in patients with no known history of intrinsic renal disease are greater than the commonly quoted reference values that are obtained by ultrasonography.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2215/cjn.00930306

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 265

Metadata

Authors
Cheong, B., Muthupillai, R., Rubin, M. F., & Flamm, S. D.
Venue
Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Published
2007-01
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
38-45
ISSN
1555-9041 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2104939030
Cited by
265
References
0
FWCI
3.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Normal Values for Renal Length and Volume as Measured by Magnetic Resonance Imaging. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2215/cjn.00930306
The paper
Cheong, B., Muthupillai, R., Rubin, M. F., & Flamm, S. D. (2007). Normal Values for Renal Length and Volume as Measured by Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology. https://doi.org/10.2215/cjn.00930306

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.