European journal of radiology · 2021
Contrast-enhanced MRI for simultaneous evaluation of renal morphology and split renal function in living kidney donor candidates.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Krumm Patrick, Hupka Tanja, Haußmann Florian, Dittmann Helmut, Mühlbacher Thomas, Nadalin Silvio, Königsrainer Alfred, Nikolaou Konstantin, Heyne Nils, Kramer Ulrich, Guthoff Martina
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The evaluation process of potential living kidney donors focusses on renal anatomy and split renal function. This study aimed to evaluate a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based approach for simultaneous evaluation of both and its impact on clinical decision making.
METHOD: Over a 3-year period, 65 potential living kidney donors were consecutively enrolled. The MRI protocol was extended by MR-nephrography to measure split renal function. Standard DTPA-scintigraphy was used for functional comparison.
RESULTS: Split renal function showed no systematic bias between the two methods (mean difference 0.3%, p = 0.08). Both methods would have yielded the same clinical decision for donor nephrectomy in 75% of the patients. In 25 % of the patients, one method indicated a relevant side difference while the other did not, and a different clinical decision could have been made based on split renal function alone.
CONCLUSIONS: MRI proved eligible for comprehensive living kidney donor evaluation and non-inferior to scintigraphy for determining split renal function. In clinical decision making, these two methods would have resulted in the same side for donor nephrectomy in a large proportion of potential donors. Whether MRN will be implemented in clinical practice depends on transplant centre infrastructure and policy.
METHOD: Over a 3-year period, 65 potential living kidney donors were consecutively enrolled. The MRI protocol was extended by MR-nephrography to measure split renal function. Standard DTPA-scintigraphy was used for functional comparison.
RESULTS: Split renal function showed no systematic bias between the two methods (mean difference 0.3%, p = 0.08). Both methods would have yielded the same clinical decision for donor nephrectomy in 75% of the patients. In 25 % of the patients, one method indicated a relevant side difference while the other did not, and a different clinical decision could have been made based on split renal function alone.
CONCLUSIONS: MRI proved eligible for comprehensive living kidney donor evaluation and non-inferior to scintigraphy for determining split renal function. In clinical decision making, these two methods would have resulted in the same side for donor nephrectomy in a large proportion of potential donors. Whether MRN will be implemented in clinical practice depends on transplant centre infrastructure and policy.