We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Noninvasive investigation for renal artery stenosis: contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography and color Doppler sonography as compared to digital subtraction angiography.
Clinical and Experimental Hypertension : CHE 2001 October
INTRODUCTION: The question about the most appropriate non-invasive method for detecting a renal artery stenosis (RAS) when comparing contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) and color Doppler sonography (CDS) is still under discussion. Therefore we conducted a prospective study in order to evaluate both methods as compared to digital subtraction angiography (DSA).
PATIENTS/METHODS: Thirtysix consecutive patients (53,9 +/- 13,7 years) with suspected RAS were investigated. MRA was performed using gadolinium for contrast enhancement. CDS was performed using a 2.5 and 3,5 MHz transducer. A peak systolic velocity (Vmax) >200 cm/sec within renal arteries and/or a side to side difference of the resistive index (RI) of >0,05 were used to discriminate stenosis. A diameter reduction of > or = 60% by DSA was considered a stenosis relevant to the patient.
RESULTS: Sixty-eight main renal arteries and 9 accessory vessels were detected by DSA. Twenty main and 3 accessory arteries were found to be stenosed > or = 60%, while 4 main and 1 accessory artery presented with occlusion. MRA detected 70 renal vessels (65 main and 5 accessory arteries). Twenty-one stenosed arteries and 4 occluded vessels were correctly diagnosed by MRA. With CDS 68 renal vessels (62 main and 6 accessory arteries) could be visual- ized out of which 21 stenoses were diagnosed because of increased Vmax and 6 stenoses were detected because of a side to side difference of RI. For main renal arteries sensitivities and specificities were 96% and 86% for MRA and 96% and 89% for CDS.
CONCLUSIONS: MRA and CDS are both comparable methods for detection of a renal artery stenosis > or = 60%. Despite several limitations, CDS can at the moment still be favored as a screening method.
PATIENTS/METHODS: Thirtysix consecutive patients (53,9 +/- 13,7 years) with suspected RAS were investigated. MRA was performed using gadolinium for contrast enhancement. CDS was performed using a 2.5 and 3,5 MHz transducer. A peak systolic velocity (Vmax) >200 cm/sec within renal arteries and/or a side to side difference of the resistive index (RI) of >0,05 were used to discriminate stenosis. A diameter reduction of > or = 60% by DSA was considered a stenosis relevant to the patient.
RESULTS: Sixty-eight main renal arteries and 9 accessory vessels were detected by DSA. Twenty main and 3 accessory arteries were found to be stenosed > or = 60%, while 4 main and 1 accessory artery presented with occlusion. MRA detected 70 renal vessels (65 main and 5 accessory arteries). Twenty-one stenosed arteries and 4 occluded vessels were correctly diagnosed by MRA. With CDS 68 renal vessels (62 main and 6 accessory arteries) could be visual- ized out of which 21 stenoses were diagnosed because of increased Vmax and 6 stenoses were detected because of a side to side difference of RI. For main renal arteries sensitivities and specificities were 96% and 86% for MRA and 96% and 89% for CDS.
CONCLUSIONS: MRA and CDS are both comparable methods for detection of a renal artery stenosis > or = 60%. Despite several limitations, CDS can at the moment still be favored as a screening method.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app