Abstract
Abstract
Background
Renal arterial embolization (RAE) is considered to be a safe and effective method for treating a variety of renal lesions and pathology. It is the optimal method not only to stop bleeding, but to preserve renal parenchyma and renal function. Patients who are scheduled to RAE who showed negative catheter angiography with the procedure subsequently denied have a special concern because they are subjected to unnecessary procedure with its complications and didn’t get its benefits. This circumstance is infrequently reported in the literature, and that compelled us to identify the predictors of negative renal angiography findings that would result in a failure to undertake RAE.
Results
The study included 180 patients (126 males; 70%) with a mean ± SD age of 44 ± 14 years. Iatrogenic causes were the most common indication for RAE (108 of 180; 60%), while spontaneous unknown reasons constituted (17 of 180 patients; 9%). Angiography showed various lesions in 148 patients: pseudoaneurysm (80 of 148; 54%), tumours (28 of 148; 19%), arteriovenous (AV) fistulas (22 of 148; 15%)
and both pseudoaneurysm and AV fistulas (18 of 148; 12%). However, in the remaining 32 of 180 patients (18%) no lesions were identified on renal angiography and RAE procedures were not undertaken. On bivariate analysis, neither gender, side of the lesions, haematuria prior to RAE, or renal artery anatomy were predictors for negative angiography. However, the indication for RAE (spontaneous unknown reasons) of renal haemorrhage was the only predictor for negative angiography (9/17 (53%), P = 0.001).
Conclusion
Patients scheduled for RAE may show negative findings with no lesions on renal angiography. Among the different indications for RAE, patients with spontaneous (unknown) have the highest probability (53%) of being associated with negative renal angiography findings, however, those with renal tumours and post-traumatic causes have a low probability. In those patients with spontaneous (unknown), conservative management should be the initial treatment of choice in order to avoid unnecessary RAE and its associated complications.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging
Reference19 articles.
1. Hotaling JM, Sorensen MD, Smith TG 3rd et al (2011) Analysis of diagnostic angiography and angioembolization in the acute management of renal trauma using a national data set. J Urol 185:1316–1320
2. Pappas P, Leonardou P, Papadoukakis S et al (2006) Urgent superselective segmental renal artery embolization in the treatment of life-threatening renal hemorrhage. Urol Int 77:34–41
3. Bakal CW, Cynamon J, Lakritz PS et al (1993) Value of preoperative renal artery embolization in reducing blood transfusion requirements during nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. J Vasc Interv Radiol 4:727–731
4. Bishay VL, Crino PB, Wein AJ et al (2010) Embolization of giant renal angiomyolipomas: technique and results. J Vasc Interv Radiol 21:67–72
5. Mao Q, Wang C, Chen G et al (2019) Failure of initial superselective renal arterial embolization in the treatment of renal hemorrhage after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a respective analysis of risk factors. Exp Ther Med 18:4151–4156