Mojtaba Sadeghi-Azandaryani1, Hanna Zimmermann2, Insa Korten3, Alexander Klose4, Patrick Scheiermann5, Marcus Treitl2, Jens Heyn6. 1. Department of Vascular Surgery, Erding Hospital, Erding, Germany; Department of Surgery, University of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany. 2. Department of Radiology, University of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany. 3. Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Inselspital and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. 4. Department of Vascular Surgery, Erding Hospital, Erding, Germany. 5. Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany. 6. Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany. Electronic address: jens.heyn@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Coverage of an accessory renal artery (ARA) during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) may result in renal infarction (RI) or decline in renal function. Until now, it remains vague which patients are at risk to develop these complications. We therefore analyzed the effect of ARA sealing by EVAR with respect to the occurrence of RI and renal function. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the medical records and computed tomographic scans of patients who underwent EVAR within a period of 5 years was performed. Particular attention was paid to the presence or absence of accessory renal arteries and renal function before EVAR. Thirty-four patients with ARA were matched 1:3 to 102 patients without ARA. The results after EVAR were analyzed in patients with and without ARA. In patients with ARA, we further examined the results after EVAR in patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥ 60 mL/min and eGFR < 60 mL/min before EVAR. RESULTS: Before EVAR, the median eGFR was 74 mL/min (25th/75th percentiles, 57/89) in patients with ARA and 72 mL/min (25th/75th percentiles, 63/87) in patients without ARA. Alterations in eGFR were significantly pronounced in patients with ARA when compared with patients without ARA 1 week after EVAR (ARA, -10.7 ± 16.9 mL/min vs without ARA, 1.2 ± 13.3 mL/min; P = .002) and after 6 months (ARA, -10.8 ± 17.4 mL/min vs without ARA, 1.2 ± 13.3 mL/min; P = .001). RI only occurred in patients with ARA. Within the group of patients with ARA, patients with normal renal function (NF) showed a more pronounced decline in eGFR preoperatively when compared with patients with impaired renal function (IF) 1 week after EVAR (NF, -14.3 ± 18.0 mL/min vs IF, -1.3 ± 10.8 mL/min; P = .02) and after 6 months (NF, -15.8 ± 17.9 mL/min vs IF, 0.1 ± 15.2 mL/min; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: The decrease in renal function was more pronounced in patients with ARA after EVAR when compared with patients without ARA undergoing EVAR. In patients with ARA, the observed decline in renal function was significantly distinct in patients presenting NF preoperatively. Consequently, the risk of IF after EVAR seems to be increased in patients with ARA and normal preoperative renal function.
OBJECTIVE: Coverage of an accessory renal artery (ARA) during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) may result in renal infarction (RI) or decline in renal function. Until now, it remains vague which patients are at risk to develop these complications. We therefore analyzed the effect of ARA sealing by EVAR with respect to the occurrence of RI and renal function. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the medical records and computed tomographic scans of patients who underwent EVAR within a period of 5 years was performed. Particular attention was paid to the presence or absence of accessory renal arteries and renal function before EVAR. Thirty-four patients with ARA were matched 1:3 to 102 patients without ARA. The results after EVAR were analyzed in patients with and without ARA. In patients with ARA, we further examined the results after EVAR in patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥ 60 mL/min and eGFR < 60 mL/min before EVAR. RESULTS: Before EVAR, the median eGFR was 74 mL/min (25th/75th percentiles, 57/89) in patients with ARA and 72 mL/min (25th/75th percentiles, 63/87) in patients without ARA. Alterations in eGFR were significantly pronounced in patients with ARA when compared with patients without ARA 1 week after EVAR (ARA, -10.7 ± 16.9 mL/min vs without ARA, 1.2 ± 13.3 mL/min; P = .002) and after 6 months (ARA, -10.8 ± 17.4 mL/min vs without ARA, 1.2 ± 13.3 mL/min; P = .001). RI only occurred in patients with ARA. Within the group of patients with ARA, patients with normal renal function (NF) showed a more pronounced decline in eGFR preoperatively when compared with patients with impaired renal function (IF) 1 week after EVAR (NF, -14.3 ± 18.0 mL/min vs IF, -1.3 ± 10.8 mL/min; P = .02) and after 6 months (NF, -15.8 ± 17.9 mL/min vs IF, 0.1 ± 15.2 mL/min; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: The decrease in renal function was more pronounced in patients with ARA after EVAR when compared with patients without ARA undergoing EVAR. In patients with ARA, the observed decline in renal function was significantly distinct in patients presenting NF preoperatively. Consequently, the risk of IF after EVAR seems to be increased in patients with ARA and normal preoperative renal function.