Multidetector row CT angiography of living related renal donors

Is there a need for venous phase imaging?

Saravanan Namasivayam, Mannudeep K. Kalra, Sandra M. Waldrop, Pardeep Mittal, William C. Small

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To prospectively evaluate whether renal venous anatomy can be detected from arterial phase images of multidetector row CT (MDCT) of renal donors. Material and methods: Institutional review board approved our study protocol with waiver of consent. Forty-eight consecutive renal donors (age range, 21-56 years; M:F, 20:28) referred for MDCT evaluation were included. Two sub-specialty radiologists performed an independent and separate evaluation of renal venous anatomy in arterial and venous phase images. Opacification of renal venous structures was scored on a five-point scale (1-not seen; 3-minimal opacification; 5-excellent opacification). Arterial and venous phase opacification scores were compared by Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: Both readers detected all renal venous anomalies in arterial as well as venous phase images. Each reader detected accessory right renal veins (n = 14), retroaortic left renal vein (n = 2), circumaortic left renal vein (n = 1), and left renal hilar arteriovenous malformation (n = 1) in arterial phase images. Retroaortic left renal venous branch was difficult to differentiate from lumbar vein (reader-1, n = 1; reader-2, n = 2) in both arterial and venous phase images. Sensitivity of detection of renal veins, left adrenal, gonadal and lumbar veins in arterial phase images was 100, 83-88, 100, and 85-90%, respectively. As expected, venous phase images showed significantly greater opacification of renal veins, left gonadal, adrenal and lumbar veins (p < .05). However, this did not substantially limit the evaluation of renal venous anatomy in arterial phase images. Both readers had substantial interobserver agreement (kappa coefficient, 0.7; p < 0.05). Conclusions: Arterial phase MDCT images alone can be used to detect renal venous anomalies, and to identify small left renal venous branches namely, the left gonadal, adrenal and lumbar veins in renal donors. Venous phase MDCT acquisition is not necessary for evaluation of renal venous anatomy in renal donors.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)442-452
Number of pages11
JournalEuropean Journal of Radiology
Volume59
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Tissue Donors
Kidney
Renal Veins
Anatomy
Veins
Computed Tomography Angiography
Arteriovenous Malformations
Research Ethics Committees
Nonparametric Statistics

Keywords

  • Angiography
  • Computed tomography (CT)
  • Kidney
  • Multi-detector row
  • Transplantation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Multidetector row CT angiography of living related renal donors : Is there a need for venous phase imaging? / Namasivayam, Saravanan; Kalra, Mannudeep K.; Waldrop, Sandra M.; Mittal, Pardeep; Small, William C.

In: European Journal of Radiology, Vol. 59, No. 3, 01.09.2006, p. 442-452.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Namasivayam, Saravanan ; Kalra, Mannudeep K. ; Waldrop, Sandra M. ; Mittal, Pardeep ; Small, William C. / Multidetector row CT angiography of living related renal donors : Is there a need for venous phase imaging?. In: European Journal of Radiology. 2006 ; Vol. 59, No. 3. pp. 442-452.
@article{22ced016723142ed9baa5f0b7e1735e9,
title = "Multidetector row CT angiography of living related renal donors: Is there a need for venous phase imaging?",
abstract = "Objective: To prospectively evaluate whether renal venous anatomy can be detected from arterial phase images of multidetector row CT (MDCT) of renal donors. Material and methods: Institutional review board approved our study protocol with waiver of consent. Forty-eight consecutive renal donors (age range, 21-56 years; M:F, 20:28) referred for MDCT evaluation were included. Two sub-specialty radiologists performed an independent and separate evaluation of renal venous anatomy in arterial and venous phase images. Opacification of renal venous structures was scored on a five-point scale (1-not seen; 3-minimal opacification; 5-excellent opacification). Arterial and venous phase opacification scores were compared by Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: Both readers detected all renal venous anomalies in arterial as well as venous phase images. Each reader detected accessory right renal veins (n = 14), retroaortic left renal vein (n = 2), circumaortic left renal vein (n = 1), and left renal hilar arteriovenous malformation (n = 1) in arterial phase images. Retroaortic left renal venous branch was difficult to differentiate from lumbar vein (reader-1, n = 1; reader-2, n = 2) in both arterial and venous phase images. Sensitivity of detection of renal veins, left adrenal, gonadal and lumbar veins in arterial phase images was 100, 83-88, 100, and 85-90{\%}, respectively. As expected, venous phase images showed significantly greater opacification of renal veins, left gonadal, adrenal and lumbar veins (p < .05). However, this did not substantially limit the evaluation of renal venous anatomy in arterial phase images. Both readers had substantial interobserver agreement (kappa coefficient, 0.7; p < 0.05). Conclusions: Arterial phase MDCT images alone can be used to detect renal venous anomalies, and to identify small left renal venous branches namely, the left gonadal, adrenal and lumbar veins in renal donors. Venous phase MDCT acquisition is not necessary for evaluation of renal venous anatomy in renal donors.",
keywords = "Angiography, Computed tomography (CT), Kidney, Multi-detector row, Transplantation",
author = "Saravanan Namasivayam and Kalra, {Mannudeep K.} and Waldrop, {Sandra M.} and Pardeep Mittal and Small, {William C.}",
year = "2006",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ejrad.2006.03.018",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "59",
pages = "442--452",
journal = "Journal of Medical Imaging",
issn = "0720-048X",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Multidetector row CT angiography of living related renal donors

T2 - Is there a need for venous phase imaging?

AU - Namasivayam, Saravanan

AU - Kalra, Mannudeep K.

AU - Waldrop, Sandra M.

AU - Mittal, Pardeep

AU - Small, William C.

PY - 2006/9/1

Y1 - 2006/9/1

N2 - Objective: To prospectively evaluate whether renal venous anatomy can be detected from arterial phase images of multidetector row CT (MDCT) of renal donors. Material and methods: Institutional review board approved our study protocol with waiver of consent. Forty-eight consecutive renal donors (age range, 21-56 years; M:F, 20:28) referred for MDCT evaluation were included. Two sub-specialty radiologists performed an independent and separate evaluation of renal venous anatomy in arterial and venous phase images. Opacification of renal venous structures was scored on a five-point scale (1-not seen; 3-minimal opacification; 5-excellent opacification). Arterial and venous phase opacification scores were compared by Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: Both readers detected all renal venous anomalies in arterial as well as venous phase images. Each reader detected accessory right renal veins (n = 14), retroaortic left renal vein (n = 2), circumaortic left renal vein (n = 1), and left renal hilar arteriovenous malformation (n = 1) in arterial phase images. Retroaortic left renal venous branch was difficult to differentiate from lumbar vein (reader-1, n = 1; reader-2, n = 2) in both arterial and venous phase images. Sensitivity of detection of renal veins, left adrenal, gonadal and lumbar veins in arterial phase images was 100, 83-88, 100, and 85-90%, respectively. As expected, venous phase images showed significantly greater opacification of renal veins, left gonadal, adrenal and lumbar veins (p < .05). However, this did not substantially limit the evaluation of renal venous anatomy in arterial phase images. Both readers had substantial interobserver agreement (kappa coefficient, 0.7; p < 0.05). Conclusions: Arterial phase MDCT images alone can be used to detect renal venous anomalies, and to identify small left renal venous branches namely, the left gonadal, adrenal and lumbar veins in renal donors. Venous phase MDCT acquisition is not necessary for evaluation of renal venous anatomy in renal donors.

AB - Objective: To prospectively evaluate whether renal venous anatomy can be detected from arterial phase images of multidetector row CT (MDCT) of renal donors. Material and methods: Institutional review board approved our study protocol with waiver of consent. Forty-eight consecutive renal donors (age range, 21-56 years; M:F, 20:28) referred for MDCT evaluation were included. Two sub-specialty radiologists performed an independent and separate evaluation of renal venous anatomy in arterial and venous phase images. Opacification of renal venous structures was scored on a five-point scale (1-not seen; 3-minimal opacification; 5-excellent opacification). Arterial and venous phase opacification scores were compared by Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: Both readers detected all renal venous anomalies in arterial as well as venous phase images. Each reader detected accessory right renal veins (n = 14), retroaortic left renal vein (n = 2), circumaortic left renal vein (n = 1), and left renal hilar arteriovenous malformation (n = 1) in arterial phase images. Retroaortic left renal venous branch was difficult to differentiate from lumbar vein (reader-1, n = 1; reader-2, n = 2) in both arterial and venous phase images. Sensitivity of detection of renal veins, left adrenal, gonadal and lumbar veins in arterial phase images was 100, 83-88, 100, and 85-90%, respectively. As expected, venous phase images showed significantly greater opacification of renal veins, left gonadal, adrenal and lumbar veins (p < .05). However, this did not substantially limit the evaluation of renal venous anatomy in arterial phase images. Both readers had substantial interobserver agreement (kappa coefficient, 0.7; p < 0.05). Conclusions: Arterial phase MDCT images alone can be used to detect renal venous anomalies, and to identify small left renal venous branches namely, the left gonadal, adrenal and lumbar veins in renal donors. Venous phase MDCT acquisition is not necessary for evaluation of renal venous anatomy in renal donors.

KW - Angiography

KW - Computed tomography (CT)

KW - Kidney

KW - Multi-detector row

KW - Transplantation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33748050790&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33748050790&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ejrad.2006.03.018

DO - 10.1016/j.ejrad.2006.03.018

M3 - Article

VL - 59

SP - 442

EP - 452

JO - Journal of Medical Imaging

JF - Journal of Medical Imaging

SN - 0720-048X

IS - 3

ER -