OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of plaque composition on renal function after renal artery intervention (RAI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 33 consecutive patients with atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis (enrolled between January 1, 2007, and April 30, 2009), renal angiography, pressure gradients across the lesion, and intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) with virtual histology (VH)-derived plaque characteristics were assessed. In 25 patients who underwent RAI, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was evaluated at baseline and at 3 months. RESULTS: Mean pressure gradients across the lesion were poorly associated with baseline eGFR (r=-0.37; P=.07). In gray scale IVUS data, only remodeling index was significantly correlated with baseline eGFR (r=-0.38; P=.03). Plaque components classified by VH-IVUS had no correlation with baseline eGFR. During follow-up of 25 patients, the improvement in eGFR after RAI was observed in 9 patients, unchanged in 3, and deteriorated in 13. Overall, follow-up eGFR (median, 49.0 mL/min/1.73 m(2); interquartile range [IQR], 40.6-63.9 mL/min/1.73 m(2)) was unchanged compared with baseline eGFR (median, 53.8 mL/min/1.73 m(2); IQR, 41.4-63.4 mL/min/1.73 m(2); P=.38). The percent change in eGFR (median, -0.2%; IQR, -16.0% to 16.0%) after RAI had a significant negative correlation with the mean percentage of necrotic core classified by VH-IVUS (r=-0.47; P=.02), and the mean percentage of necrotic core was significantly larger in patients with deterioration of eGFR than in patients without deterioration of eGFR (median, 12.7%; IQR, 9.5%-19.5%; vs median, 8.3%; IQR, 5.5%-11.6%; P=.04). CONCLUSION: In patients with atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis, the change in eGFR after RAI was related to plaque composition classified by VH-IVUS. The evaluation of plaque composition may provide more insights into the change in renal function after RAI.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of plaque composition on renal function after renal artery intervention (RAI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 33 consecutive patients with atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis (enrolled between January 1, 2007, and April 30, 2009), renal angiography, pressure gradients across the lesion, and intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) with virtual histology (VH)-derived plaque characteristics were assessed. In 25 patients who underwent RAI, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was evaluated at baseline and at 3 months. RESULTS: Mean pressure gradients across the lesion were poorly associated with baseline eGFR (r=-0.37; P=.07). In gray scale IVUS data, only remodeling index was significantly correlated with baseline eGFR (r=-0.38; P=.03). Plaque components classified by VH-IVUS had no correlation with baseline eGFR. During follow-up of 25 patients, the improvement in eGFR after RAI was observed in 9 patients, unchanged in 3, and deteriorated in 13. Overall, follow-up eGFR (median, 49.0 mL/min/1.73 m(2); interquartile range [IQR], 40.6-63.9 mL/min/1.73 m(2)) was unchanged compared with baseline eGFR (median, 53.8 mL/min/1.73 m(2); IQR, 41.4-63.4 mL/min/1.73 m(2); P=.38). The percent change in eGFR (median, -0.2%; IQR, -16.0% to 16.0%) after RAI had a significant negative correlation with the mean percentage of necrotic core classified by VH-IVUS (r=-0.47; P=.02), and the mean percentage of necrotic core was significantly larger in patients with deterioration of eGFR than in patients without deterioration of eGFR (median, 12.7%; IQR, 9.5%-19.5%; vs median, 8.3%; IQR, 5.5%-11.6%; P=.04). CONCLUSION: In patients with atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis, the change in eGFR after RAI was related to plaque composition classified by VH-IVUS. The evaluation of plaque composition may provide more insights into the change in renal function after RAI.
Authors: Gastón A Rodriguez-Granillo; Sophia Vaina; Héctor M García-García; Marco Valgimigli; Eric Duckers; Robert J van Geuns; Evelyn Regar; William J van der Giessen; Marco Bressers; Dick Goedhart; Marie-Angele Morel; Pim J de Feyter; Patrick W Serruys Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2006-03-31 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Andrew S Levey; Josef Coresh; Tom Greene; Jane Marsh; Lesley A Stevens; John W Kusek; Frederick Van Lente Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2007-03-01 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Benny Drieghe; Juraj Madaric; Giovanna Sarno; Ganesh Manoharan; Jozef Bartunek; Guy R Heyndrickx; Nico H J Pijls; Bernard De Bruyne Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Edward B Diethrich; M Pauliina Margolis; Donald B Reid; Allen Burke; Venkatesh Ramaiah; Julio A Rodriguez-Lopez; Grayson Wheatley; Dawn Olsen; Renu Virmani Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: Matthew A Allison; Elizabeth O Lillie; Dominic DiTomasso; C Michael Wright; Michael H Criqui Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-10-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Yoshiki Matsuo; Takuro Takumi; Verghese Mathew; Woo-Young Chung; Gregory W Barsness; Charanjit S Rihal; Rajiv Gulati; Eric T McCue; David R Holmes; Eric Eeckhout; Ryan J Lennon; Lilach O Lerman; Amir Lerman Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2012-05-31 Impact factor: 5.162