首页> 外文期刊>Clinical and experimental hypertension: CEH >Noninvasive investigation for renal artery stenosis: contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography and color Doppler sonography as compared to digital subtraction angiography.
【24h】

Noninvasive investigation for renal artery stenosis: contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography and color Doppler sonography as compared to digital subtraction angiography.

机译:肾动脉狭窄的非侵入性研究:与数字减影血管造影相比,造影剂增强型磁共振血管造影和彩色多普勒超声检查。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

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.
机译:简介:在比较造影剂增强磁共振血管造影(MRA)和彩色多普勒超声(CDS)时,最合适的非侵入性方法来检测肾动脉狭窄(RAS)的问题仍在讨论中。因此,我们进行了前瞻性研究,以评估与数字减影血管造影(DSA)相比的两种方法。患者/方法:调查了36例疑似RAS的连续患者(53,9 +/- 13,7岁)。使用RA进行MRA增强对比。 CDS使用2.5和3.5 MHz换能器进行。肾动脉内的收缩压峰值(Vmax)> 200 cm / sec和/或阻力指数(RI)的左右差异> 0.05用来区分狭窄。 DSA将直径缩小≥60%视为与患者相关的狭窄。结果:DSA检出了68条主要肾动脉和9条副血管。发现20条主动脉和3条副动脉狭窄或≥60%,而4条主动脉和1条副动脉闭塞。 MRA检测到70条肾脏血管(65条主动脉和5条副动脉)。 MRA正确诊断出21条狭窄的动脉和4条闭塞的血管。使用CDS可以看到68条肾血管(62条主动脉和6条副动脉),其中由于Vmax升高而诊断出21个狭窄,而由于RI的左右差异而检测到6个狭窄。对于主要肾动脉,MRA的敏感性和特异性分别为96%和86%,而CDS的敏感性和特异性分别为96%和89%。结论:MRA和CDS都是可比较的检测肾动脉狭窄>或= 60%的方法。尽管有一些限制,但CDS目前仍可作为筛选方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号