PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the microvascular plug (MVP) for selective renal artery embolization. METHODS: Retrospective review was performed on a cohort of 6 patients undergoing renal artery embolization using the MVP between July 2015 and August 2018. Patients' demographics, indication for embolization, technical details of the embolization procedure, and clinical events were gathered from the patients' electronic medical records. RESULTS: The patients underwent selective renal artery embolization with a MVP for iatrogenic vascular injuries (n = 3), traumatic vascular injuries (n = 2), and for elective embolization of an angiomyolipoma (n = 1), in native kidneys (n = 4) or in renal allografts (n = 2). Immediate occlusion of the feeding artery was achieved with 1 MVP device in 4 patients. In 1 patient, a second MVP was needed, and in another patient, additional 0.018-inch microcoils were used to completely occlude the injured artery. Technical success was achieved in all patients. The volume of the resulting renal infarction was estimated less than 5% of the renal volume. No other procedure-related complications occurred. CONCLUSION: The MVP is a safe and effective device allowing superselective renal artery embolization. Therefore, we recommend the MVP as a valuable embolic in superselective renal artery embolization. Additionally, a single device is sufficient in most cases, potentially reducing the cost, duration, and radiation exposure of the procedure.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the microvascular plug (MVP) for selective renal artery embolization. METHODS: Retrospective review was performed on a cohort of 6 patients undergoing renal artery embolization using the MVP between July 2015 and August 2018. Patients' demographics, indication for embolization, technical details of the embolization procedure, and clinical events were gathered from the patients' electronic medical records. RESULTS: The patients underwent selective renal artery embolization with a MVP for iatrogenic vascular injuries (n = 3), traumatic vascular injuries (n = 2), and for elective embolization of an angiomyolipoma (n = 1), in native kidneys (n = 4) or in renal allografts (n = 2). Immediate occlusion of the feeding artery was achieved with 1 MVP device in 4 patients. In 1 patient, a second MVP was needed, and in another patient, additional 0.018-inch microcoils were used to completely occlude the injured artery. Technical success was achieved in all patients. The volume of the resulting renal infarction was estimated less than 5% of the renal volume. No other procedure-related complications occurred. CONCLUSION: The MVP is a safe and effective device allowing superselective renal artery embolization. Therefore, we recommend the MVP as a valuable embolic in superselective renal artery embolization. Additionally, a single device is sufficient in most cases, potentially reducing the cost, duration, and radiation exposure of the procedure.