BACKGROUND: Currently, multidetector computed tomographic (MDCT) angiography has become a noninvasive alternative imaging modality to catheter renal angiography for the evaluation of renal vascular anatomy in living renal donors. In this study, we investigated the diagnostic accuracy of 16-slice MDCT in the preoperative assessment of living renal donors. METHODS: Fifty-nine consecutive living renal donors (32 men, 27 women) underwent MDCT angiography followed by open donor nephrectomy. All MDCT studies were performed by using a 16-slice MDCT scanner with the same protocol consisting of arterial and nephrographic phases followed by conventional abdominal radiography. The MDCT images were assessed retrospectively for the number and branching pattern of the renal arteries and for the number and presence of major or minor variants of the renal veins. The results were compared with open surgical results. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of MDCT for the detection of anatomic variants of renal arteries including the accessory arteries (n = 9), early arterial branching (n = 7) and major renal venous anomalies including the accessory renal veins (n = 3), late venous confluence (n = 4), circumaortic (n = 2) or retroaortic (n = 3) left renal veins were 100%. However, the sensitivity for identification of minor venous variants was 79%. All of three ureteral duplications were correctly identified at excretory phase conventional abdominal radiography. CONCLUSION: Sixteen-slice MDCT is highly accurate for the identification of anatomic variants of renal arteries and veins. Dual-phase MDCT angiography including arterial and nephrographic phases followed by conventional abdominal radiography enables complete assessment of renal donors without significant increase of radiation dose. However, the evaluation of minor venous variants may be problematic because of their small diameters and poor opacification.
BACKGROUND: Currently, multidetector computed tomographic (MDCT) angiography has become a noninvasive alternative imaging modality to catheter renal angiography for the evaluation of renal vascular anatomy in living renal donors. In this study, we investigated the diagnostic accuracy of 16-slice MDCT in the preoperative assessment of living renal donors. METHODS: Fifty-nine consecutive living renal donors (32 men, 27 women) underwent MDCT angiography followed by open donor nephrectomy. All MDCT studies were performed by using a 16-slice MDCT scanner with the same protocol consisting of arterial and nephrographic phases followed by conventional abdominal radiography. The MDCT images were assessed retrospectively for the number and branching pattern of the renal arteries and for the number and presence of major or minor variants of the renal veins. The results were compared with open surgical results. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of MDCT for the detection of anatomic variants of renal arteries including the accessory arteries (n = 9), early arterial branching (n = 7) and major renal venous anomalies including the accessory renal veins (n = 3), late venous confluence (n = 4), circumaortic (n = 2) or retroaortic (n = 3) left renal veins were 100%. However, the sensitivity for identification of minor venous variants was 79%. All of three ureteral duplications were correctly identified at excretory phase conventional abdominal radiography. CONCLUSION: Sixteen-slice MDCT is highly accurate for the identification of anatomic variants of renal arteries and veins. Dual-phase MDCT angiography including arterial and nephrographic phases followed by conventional abdominal radiography enables complete assessment of renal donors without significant increase of radiation dose. However, the evaluation of minor venous variants may be problematic because of their small diameters and poor opacification.
Authors: Enrique Lopez Hänninen; Timm Denecke; Lars Stelter; Maciej Pech; Petr Podrabsky; Johann Pratschke; Jens Ricke; Ralf Schindler; Peter Neuhaus; Ronald Felix; Stefan G Tullius; Stefen G Tullius Journal: Transpl Int Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 3.782
Authors: Steven S Raman; Suwalee Pojchamarnwiputh; Kobkun Muangsomboon; Peter G Schulam; H Albin Gritsch; David S K Lu Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Satomi Kawamoto; Robert A Montgomery; Leo P Lawler; Karen M Horton; Elliot K Fishman Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: G D Rubin; E J Alfrey; M D Dake; C P Semba; F G Sommer; P C Kuo; D C Dafoe; J A Waskerwitz; D A Bloch; R B Jeffrey Journal: Radiology Date: 1995-05 Impact factor: 11.105