This study describes a systematic comparison of intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography (DSA) of the main renal arteries with conventional angiography (CA), the currently accepted "gold standard" for the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis.
Twenty-five patients scheduled for abdominal aortography for various indications underwent first DSA then CA. The DSA and CA images were evaluated for number of renal arteries, presence and grade of renal artery stenosis, presence of post-stenotic dilation or fibromuscular changes, and diagnostic and pictorial adequacy of the images. DSA was found to be diagnostically adequate in 92 % of cases, compared with 96 % for CA.
In evaluating significant main renal artery stenosis, which the authors assumed to be any stenosis greater than 50%, there were 10 such stenoses seen by CA. DSA also detected 10 cases, but there was 1 false positive and 1 false negative, yielding a sensitivity of 90 % and a specificity of 98%. There was also close correlation of DSA and CA for the few cases of post-stenotic dilatation and fibromuscular dysplasia encountered. The authors conclude that DSA is an acceptable substitute for CA in the evaluation of patients for main renal artery stenosis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Lewin A., Blaufox D., Castle H., et al: Apparent prevalence of curable hypertension in the hypertension detection and follow-up program. Arch Intern Med145:424-427, 1985.
2.
Working Group on Renovascular Hypertension.Final report of the Working Group on Renovascular Hypertension . Arch Intern Med147:820-829, 1987.
3.
Tucker RM, Labarthe DR: Frequency of surgical treatment for hypertension in adults at the Mayo Clinic from 1973 through 1975. May Clin Proc52:549-555, AM.
4.
DeBakey ME, Morris GC Jr, Morgen RO, et al: Lesions of the renal artery: Surgical technique and results . Am J Surg107:84-96, 1964.
5.
Connor TB, Thomas WC Jr, Haddock L., et al: Unilateral disease as a cause of hypertension: Its detection by ureteral catheterization studies. Ann Intern Med52:544-549, 1960.
6.
Maxwell MH, Gonick HC, Wilta R., et al: Use of the rapid sequence intravenous pyelogram in the diagnosis of renovascular hypertension. N Engl J Med270:213-220, 1964.
7.
Dorph S., Oigaard A.: Variation in size of the normal kidney following intravenous administration of watersoluble contrast medium and urea. Br J Radiol46:183-186, 1973.
8.
Talner LB, Stone RA, Coel MN, et al: Furosemide augmented intravenous urography: Results in essential hypertension. AJR130:257-260, 1978.
9.
Gunnells JC Jr, McGuffin WL Jr, Johnsrude I., et al: Peripheral and renal venous plasma renin activity in hypertension . Ann Intern Med71:555-575, 1969.
10.
Winter CC: Unilateral renal disease and hypertension: Use of the radioactive diodrast renogram as a screening test. J Urol78:107-116, 1957.
11.
Burbank MK, Hung HC, Tauxe WN, et al: Radioisotope renography: Diagnosis of renal arterial disease in hypertensive patients. Circulation27:328-338, 1963.
12.
Lalli AF: Is the hypertensive urogram a necessary examination?J Can Assoc Radiol32:11-12, 1981.
13.
Thornbury JR , Stanley JC, Fryback DG: Hypertensive urogram: A nondiscriminatory test for renovascular hypertension. AJR138:43-49, 1982.
14.
Atkinson AB , Kellett RJ: Value of intravenous urography in investigating hypertension. J R Coll PhysiciansLond8:175-181, 1974.
15.
Bailey SM, Evans DW, Fleming HA: Intravenous urography in the investigation of hypertension. Lancet2:57-58, 1975.
16.
Russel GI, Bing RF, Thurston H., et al: Plasma renin in hypertensive patients: Significance in relation to clinical and other biochemical features. Q J Med49:385-394, 1980.
17.
Kaufman JJ: Renovascular hypertension: The UCLA experience. J Urol121:139-144, 1979.
18.
Farmelant MH , Burrows BA: Sensitivity and specificity of radioisotope renography in renovascular hypertension. Contrib Nephrol11:105-109, 1978.
19.
Hillman BJ, Ovitt TW, Capp MP, et al: The potential impact of digital video subtraction angiography on screening for renovascular hypertension. Radiology142:577-579, 1982.
20.
Havey RH, Krumlousky F., delGreco F., et al: Screening for renovascular hypertension: Is renal digital-subtraction angiography the preferred noninvasive test? JAMA254:388-393, 1985.
21.
Illescas FF , Braun SD, Cohan RH, et al: Fibromuscular dysplasia of renal arteries: Comparison of intravenous digital subtraction angiography with conventional angiography. J Can Assoc Radiol39:167-171, 1988.
22.
Aaron JO, Hesselink JR, Oot R., et al: Complications of intravenous DSA performed for carotid artery disease: A prospective study. Radiology153:675-678, 1984.
23.
Dawson P.: Digital subtraction angiography—a critical analysis. Clin Radiol39:474-477, 1988.
24.
Svetkey LP, Dunnick NR, Coffman TM, et al: Comparison of intravenous digital subtraction angiography and conventional arteriography in defining renal anatomy. Transplantation45:56-58, 1988.
25.
Ball JB Jr, Lukin RR, Tomsick TA, et al: Complication of intravenous subtraction angiography. Arch Neurol42:969-972, 1985.
26.
Neergaard K., Galloe AM, Dirken KL, et al: Cardiac complications of intravenous digital subtraction angiography . Eur J Radiol9:105-107, 1989.
27.
Gritter KJ, Laidlaw WW, Peterson NJ: Complications of outpatient transbrachial intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography. Work in progress. Radiology162:125-127, 1987.
28.
Saint-George G., Aube M.: Safety of outpatient angiography: A prospective study. AJR144:235-236, 1985.
29.
Bunker SR, Cutaia FI, Fritz AL, et al: Femoral intra-arterial digital angiography: An outpatient procedure . AJR141:593-596, 1983.
30.
Norman D., Ulloa N., Brant-Zawadzki M., et al: IntraOarterial digital subtraction imaging cost considerations . Radiology156:33-35, 1985.
31.
Kadir S.: Diagnostic Angiography. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1986, p 458.
Muller FB, Sealey JE, Case DB, et al: The captopril test for indetifying renovascular disease in hypertensive patients. Am J Med80:633-644, 1986.
34.
Fommei E., Ghione S., Palla L., et al: Renal scintigraphic captopril test in the diagnosis of renovascular hypertension. Hypertension10:212-220, 1987.
35.
Sfakianakis GN, Bourgoignie JJ, Jaffe D., et al: Single-dose captopril scintigraphy in the diagnosis of renovascular hypertension. J Nuci Med28:1383-1392, 1987.
36.
deBruyn JH, Wenting GJ, Man in t Veld AJ, et al: Captopril affects blood pressure equally in renovascular and essential hypertension and in the fluid-deplated anephric state. Clin Sci59 (supply 6):83s-86s, 1980.
37.
Greminger P. , Siegenthaler W., Vetter W.: ACE inhibitors in the diagnosis and therapy of various forms of hypertension. Schweiz Med Wochenschr118:495-501, 1988.
38.
Thiobonnier M., Joseph A., Sassano P., et al: Improved diagnosis of unilateral renal artery lesions after captopril administration. JAMA251:56-60, 1984.
39.
Wenting GJ, Tan-Tjiong HL, Derkx Fhm, et al: Split renal function after captopril in unilateral renal artery stenosis. Br Med J288:886-890, 1984.
40.
Nally Jv: Renal Scintigraphy in the evaluation of renovascular hypertension: A note of optimum yet caution. J Nucl Med28:1501-1505, 1987.
41.
Robertson R. , Murphy A., Dubbins PA: Renal artery stenosis: The use of duplex ultrasound as a screening technique. Br J Radiol61:196-201, 1988.
42.
Kohler TR, Nance DR, Cramer MM, et al: Duplex scanning for diagnosis of aortoiliac and femoropopliteal disease: A prospective study. Circulation76:1074-1080, 1987.
43.
Needleman L. , Kurtz AB: Doppler evaluation of the renal transplant . J Clin Ultrasound15:661-673, 1987.
44.
Hillman BJ: Imaging adbances in the diagnosis of renovascular hypertension. AJR153:5-14, 1989.
45.
Svetkey LP, Dunnick NR, Coffman TM, et al: Comparison of intravenous digital subtraction angiography and conventional arteriography in defining renal anatomy. Transplantation45:56-58, 1988
46.
Dunnick NR, Svetkey LP, Cohan RH, et al: Intravenous digital subtraction renal angiography: Use in screening for renovascular hypertension. Radiology171:219-222, 1989.
47.
Hypertension prevalence and the status of awareness, treatment, and control in the United States: Final report of the subcommittee on definition and prevalence of the 1984 joint national committee. Hypertension7:457-468, 1985.
48.
Wolfel DA, Lovett BP, Ortenburger AL, et al: Outpatient arteriography: Its safety and cost effectiveness , Radiology153:363-364, 1984.
49.
Hillman BJ, Ovitt TW, Nudelman S., et al: Digital video subtraction angiography of renal vascularabnormalities . Radiology139:277-280, 1981.
