OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to evaluate perfusion and diffusion of kidneys in renal artery stenosis (RAS) and any correlation between stenosis and ADC values and whether this imaging modality may be a noninvasive complementary assessment technique to MR angiography before interventional procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty consecutive patients suspected of having renal artery stenosis were evaluated with renal MR angiography to exclude stenosis and were then included in the study. Transverse DW multisection echo-planar MR imaging was performed. In the transverse ADC map, rectangular regions of interest were placed in the cortex on 3 parts (upper, middle, and lower poles) in each kidney. ADCs of the kidneys were calculated separately for the low, average, and high b-values to enable differentiation of the relative influence of the perfusion fraction and true diffusion. The ADC values of 39 kidneys (13 with renal artery stenosis and 26 normal renal arteries) were compared, and the relationship between stenosis degree and ADC values was calculated. RESULTS: RAS was detected in 11 of 20 (55%) patients with MRA. Thirteen of 39 kidneys demonstrated RAS, and 26 were normal. The ADClow (1.9+/-0.2 versus 2.1+/-0.2; P=.020), ADCaverage (1.7+/-0.2 versus 1.9+/-0.1; P=.006), and ADChigh (1.8+/-0.2 versus 2.0+/-0.1; P=.012) values were significantly lower in patients with kidneys with arterial stenosis than that in patients with kidneys with normal arteries. Statistical analysis revealed that stenosis degree correlated strongly with ADClow (r=-.819; P=.001), ADCaverage (r=-.754; P=.003), and ADChigh (r=-.788; P=.001). The ADClow, ADCaverage, and ADChigh values were significantly lower in patients with kidneys with arterial stenosis than that in patients with kidneys with normal arteries. CONCLUSION: We think that DW MR imaging of kidneys with RAS can help determine the functional status of a renal artery stenosis.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to evaluate perfusion and diffusion of kidneys in renal artery stenosis (RAS) and any correlation between stenosis and ADC values and whether this imaging modality may be a noninvasive complementary assessment technique to MR angiography before interventional procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty consecutive patients suspected of having renal artery stenosis were evaluated with renal MR angiography to exclude stenosis and were then included in the study. Transverse DW multisection echo-planar MR imaging was performed. In the transverse ADC map, rectangular regions of interest were placed in the cortex on 3 parts (upper, middle, and lower poles) in each kidney. ADCs of the kidneys were calculated separately for the low, average, and high b-values to enable differentiation of the relative influence of the perfusion fraction and true diffusion. The ADC values of 39 kidneys (13 with renal artery stenosis and 26 normal renal arteries) were compared, and the relationship between stenosis degree and ADC values was calculated. RESULTS: RAS was detected in 11 of 20 (55%) patients with MRA. Thirteen of 39 kidneys demonstrated RAS, and 26 were normal. The ADClow (1.9+/-0.2 versus 2.1+/-0.2; P=.020), ADCaverage (1.7+/-0.2 versus 1.9+/-0.1; P=.006), and ADChigh (1.8+/-0.2 versus 2.0+/-0.1; P=.012) values were significantly lower in patients with kidneys with arterial stenosis than that in patients with kidneys with normal arteries. Statistical analysis revealed that stenosis degree correlated strongly with ADClow (r=-.819; P=.001), ADCaverage (r=-.754; P=.003), and ADChigh (r=-.788; P=.001). The ADClow, ADCaverage, and ADChigh values were significantly lower in patients with kidneys with arterial stenosis than that in patients with kidneys with normal arteries. CONCLUSION: We think that DW MR imaging of kidneys with RAS can help determine the functional status of a renal artery stenosis.
Authors: Lorenzo Mannelli; Jeffrey H Maki; Sherif F Osman; Hersh Chandarana; David J Lomas; William P Shuman; Ken F Linnau; Douglas E Green; Giacomo Laffi; Miriam Moshiri Journal: Curr Urol Rep Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 3.092
Authors: Jeff L Zhang; Eric E Sigmund; Hersh Chandarana; Henry Rusinek; Qun Chen; Pierre-Hugues Vivier; Bachir Taouli; Vivian S Lee Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-01-20 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jochen Herrmann; Ulrich Wenzel; Stephanie Galler; Bjoern P Schoennagel; Jasmin D Busch; Magdalini Tozakidou; Kay U Petersen; Michaela Joekel; Peter Bannas; Jin Yamamura; Michael Groth; Gerhard Adam; Christian R Habermann Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-05-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Ajaykumar C Morani; Khaled M Elsayes; Peter S Liu; William J Weadock; Janio Szklaruk; Jonathan Russell Dillman; Asra Khan; Thomas L Chenevert; Hero K Hussain Journal: World J Radiol Date: 2013-03-28
Authors: Jeff L Zhang; Eric E Sigmund; Henry Rusinek; Hersh Chandarana; Pippa Storey; Qun Chen; Vivian S Lee Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-06-23 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Ulrike I Attenberger; John N Morelli; Stefan O Schoenberg; Henrik J Michaely Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2011-11-15 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Behzad Ebrahimi; Naveen Rihal; John R Woollard; James D Krier; Alfonso Eirin; Lilach O Lerman Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 6.016