Preoperative Evaluation of Living Renal Transplant Donors: Comparison of Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Angiography and Conventional Renal Angiography.
- Author:
Seong Yup HA
1
;
Eun Sang YOO
;
Tae Gyun KWON
Author Information
1. Department of Urology, College of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea. tgkwon@knu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Transplantation;
Angiography;
Magnetic resonance angiography
- MeSH:
Angiography*;
Humans;
Magnetic Resonance Angiography*;
Nephrectomy;
Renal Artery;
Tissue Donors*;
Transplantation;
Veins
- From:Korean Journal of Urology
2005;46(9):976-980
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: This study was designed to compare conventional renal and contrast enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CRA & CE-MRA, respectively) for the preoperative evaluation of living renal transplant donors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between September 2002 and November 2004, forty-five consecutive live renal transplant donors underwent preoperative evaluations of the renal vessels, using both CRA and CE-MRA before the donor nephrectomy. The intraoperative findings of the number of renal vessels were compared with those of CRA and CE-MRA, respectively. RESULTS: Both angiographic modalities were able to detect multiple renal arteries and veins, with overall agreement between CRA and CE-MRA of 97.8 and 97.8%, respectively. The overall accuracies for predicting the number of renal arteries and veins, relative to the intraoperative findings, were 91.1 and 91.1% for CRA and 88.9 and 95.6% for CE-MRA, respectively. The CE-MRA missed 5 accessory renal arteries, whereas CRA missed 4 cases. Despite the undetected cases, there was no significant intraoperative morbidity. Additionally, renal cysts seen on CE-MRA were not detected by CRA. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that noninvasive CE-MRA is a promising substitute for CRA to evaluate the renal vessels of live renal transplant donors.
