AJR ARRS PQI
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jha, R. C.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, L. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jha, R. C.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, L. B.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?
AJR 2002; 178:1489-1495
© American Roentgen Ray Society


MR Angiography and Preoperative Evaluation for Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy

Reena C. Jha1, Shahin J. Korangy1, Susan M. Ascher1, Junko Takahama1, Paul C. Kuo2 and Lynt B. Johnson2

1 Department of Radiology, Georgetown University Hospital, 3800 Reservoir Rd., N.W., Washington, DC 20007.
2 Department of Surgery, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC 20007.

Received July 2, 2001; accepted after revision December 19, 2001.

 
Address correspondence to R. C. Jha.


Abstract
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging in imaging arterial, venous, and ureteric anatomy in a group of potential laparoscopic renal donors and to compare our findings with those established at surgery.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Sixty-four consecutive patients underwent successful laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Imaging of the kidneys was performed before surgery with MR imaging and breath-hold three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography. All studies were reviewed prospectively by one of two attending radiologists. Results were compared with findings at the time of laparoscopic nephrectomy.

RESULTS. Of the 64 patients, MR imaging and MR angiography identified 30 patients with normal arterial, venous, and ureteric anatomy, and concordance was found at surgery in 29 of these patients. Vascular anomalies were depicted on MR imaging in 34 patients, with complete concordance at surgery in 29 patients. The use of MR angiography for revealing arterial anomalies had a sensitivity of 89.4%, specificity of 94.1%, and accuracy of 90.6%. For venous anomalies, there was a sensitivity of 98.3%, specificity of 100%, and accuracy of 98.4%. No important utereric anomalies were identified at surgery or on MR imaging.

CONCLUSION. Renal MR imaging and gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography provide a safe, accurate, and minimally invasive means of comprehensive assessment of the potential living renal donor.


Introduction
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
The final step in the preoperative workup before a donor nephrectomy is the radiologic evaluation of the kidneys. The evaluation seeks to identify parenchymal abnormalities and to serve as an anatomic road map of the vascular and urinary systems. Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is growing in popularity and is becoming the standard of care for potential renal donors [1]. Because of the limited field of view of laparoscopic techniques, the role of preoperative imaging has become a crucial one in surgical planning. To our knowledge, ours is the first study to use MR imaging with gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography to evaluate a large group of potential laparoscopic renal donors.

Multiple imaging modalities have been used for the preoperative evaluation of renal donors, including sonography, CT, scintigraphy, IV urography, conventional angiography, and MR imaging [2]. MR imaging is an attractive choice because it is minimally invasive, and it can evaluate the renal parenchyma as well as the vascular anatomy without using iodinated contrast media or exposing the patient to ionizing radiation. MR angiography has been used as a minimally invasive means of preoperative radiologic evaluation of renal donors. Earlier reports involving phase-contrast MR angiographic evaluation of the kidneys questioned its accuracy and thus its effectiveness [3,4,5]. Comparison of CT angiography with MR angiography using these earlier techniques found CT to have higher accuracy [6, 7]. However, recent studies with gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography have established it as an accurate imaging modality for the visualization and evaluation of living renal donors for open nephrectomy [8,9,10]. We evaluated the effectiveness and use of gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography in a large group of renal donors undergoing laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and compared our prospective interpretation of MR images with the surgical findings.


Subjects and Methods
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
Between September 1998 and August 2000, 64 consecutive potential kidney donors at our institution underwent successful laparoscopic nephrectomy. Sonography, urinalysis, and patient history were used to identify nephrolithiasis. All patients were evaluated with MR imaging as part of the preoperative assessment for potential donation. Our study population included 35 women and 29 men with ages ranging from 19 to 63 years (mean age, 39.4 years) All MR studies were prospectively reviewed by one of two attending radiologists. The evaluation of these patients was performed by comparing preoperative radiology reports with the laparoscopic findings at nephrectomy. Two reviewers, unaware of the operative report, independently reviewed all discrepant MR imaging findings.

MR Technique
All patients underwent imaging with a 1.5-T MR system (Magnetom Vision; Siemens Medical Systems, Erlangen, Germany) and a torso phased array coil. All patients fasted for a minimum of 4 hr before the examination. A 20- or 22-gauge IV catheter was placed in an arm vein before the study. Imaging was typically completed in 45 min.

Images of the renal parenchyma were obtained before contrast agent administration with breath-hold axial and coronal T1-weighted in-phase and opposed-phase gradient-echo MR imaging (TR/first-echo TE, second-echo TE, 136/2.2, 5.3; flip angle, 70°), breath-hold axial and coronal T1-weighted fat-saturated gradient-echo imaging (TR/TE, 140/4.1; flip angle, 80°), and breath-hold axial and coronal half-Fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin-echo imaging (TR/effective TE, infinite/64). The imaging matrix using a rectangular field of view was 128-180 x 256, with the field of view from 300 to 350 cm according to body habitus.

Gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography was performed using a coronal breath-hold three-dimensional fat-saturated spoiled gradient-echo technique (5.0/2.0; flip angle, 20°) in 51 patients with the following sequence parameters: matrix, 128-140 x 256; field of view, 250-340 cm; and a slice thickness of 1.5-3 mm. In 13 patients, a breath-hold three-dimensional interpolated fat-saturated gradient-echo sequence (4.6/1.8; flip angle, 30°) was performed with the following sequence parameters: matrix, 135-180 x 256; field of view, 244-350 cm; and effective slice thickness with interpolation of 0.7-1.7 cm.

IV gadodiamide (Omniscan; Nycomed, Princeton, NJ) was administered at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg of body weight through a peripheral arm vein at a rate of 2 mL/sec followed by 20 mL of normal saline flush. A test bolus was used in three patients with 1 mL of gadolinium followed by 20 mL of normal saline to assess circulation time. However, a test bolus was not routinely used because of concern for venous contamination obscuring arterial vascular anatomy. After bolus injection, patients underwent imaging without a scan delay. A total of three acquisitions were obtained in each patient, with the first acquisition approximately 20 sec after contrast agent administration. Delayed imaging of the renal parenchyma was performed with breath-hold axial and coronal T1-weighted fat-saturated gradient-echo imaging (140/4.1; flip angle, 80°).

MR Analysis
The radiologic findings for each renal donor were correlated with the surgical findings to determine whether there were discrepancies. The preoperative MR imaging was interpreted by an experienced cross-sectional imager. Interpretation was based on film hard-copy images from all the available pulse sequences described. Maximum-intensity-projection imaging and multiplanar reconstruction were performed on an independent workstation. In each patient, findings from a comprehensive assessment of the vascular anatomy of each kidney included the number and size of renal arteries and the presence of early extrahilar branching, defined as branching occurring within the proximal 2.0 cm from the renal artery ostium (Figs. 1 and 2). Renal vein anatomy was evaluated to detect the presence of accessory renal veins, retroaortic or circumaortic variants, and lumbar vein drainage into the renal veins (Fig. 3). The renal parenchyma was evaluated to assess focal lesions and to determine the number of ureters present.



View larger version (90K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 1. 35-year-old man with bilateral renal artery anomalies. Maximum-intensity-projection image obtained from three-dimensional spoiled gradient-echo gadolinium-enhanced MR angiogram (TR/TE, 5.0/2.0; flip angle, 20°) shows two left renal arteries and dominant right renal artery with small right capsular branch (arrow) arising from aorta.

 


View larger version (106K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 2. 58-year-old man with left renal artery extrahilar branching. Maximum-intensity-projection image obtained from three-dimensional gradient-echo gadolinium-enhanced MR angiogram (TR/TE, 5.0/2.0; flip angle, 20°) shows single left renal artery with early extrahilar branching (open arrow) at 1.4 cm from left renal artery ostium and two right renal arteries (solid arrows). Left kidney was selected for harvesting.

 


View larger version (129K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 3. 48-year-old woman with venous anomaly. Maximum-intensity-projection image from MR angiogram (TR/TE, 5.0/2.0; flip angle, 20°) obtained during venous phase shows prominent retroaortic left renal vein (arrow) entering inferior vena cava lower than expected position of left renal vein. No circumaortic component was seen. Single renal arteries can be seen bilaterally. Venous anomaly was confirmed at time of left nephrectomy.

 

A transplantation surgeon performed laparoscopic nephrectomy after MR imaging evaluation. The left kidney was removed in 62 patients, and the right kidney was removed in two. The MR imaging findings were compared with the surgical findings, which were based on reviews of the operative reports and interviews of the surgeons. The cases of all patients with discrepant findings at surgery were reviewed independently by two examiners unaware of the surgical findings.

Statistical Analysis
We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MR angiography for the determination of vascular anomalies. The results found at surgery were used as the gold standard in our analysis. Patients were classified on the basis of absolute agreement between their respective MR angiographic findings and those findings reported at surgery. Our statistical results were obtained on the basis of these criteria. For further analysis, a paired Student's t test was used to compare data obtained using an interpolated MR angiography technique versus a noninterpolated MR angiography technique.


Results
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
All patients tolerated the MR imaging examination. No significant abnormalities of the renal parenchyma were described on MR imaging or seen at laparoscopic resection.

MR angiography prospectively described normal arterial, venous, and ureteric anatomy in 30 patients, with concordance in 29 at laparoscopic nephrectomy. The left kidney was chosen as the harvest site in all these patients, as is preferred, because it has a longer vascular pedicle. In one patient, the initial MR angiography reported a single left renal artery, but at surgery two renal arteries, one with extrahilar branching, were seen. This patient's case was reviewed by the two MR imaging interpreters. Both reviewers described one renal artery and noted the extrahilar branching, but a tiny accessory superior left renal artery was again missed (Fig. 4A,4B). However, both reviewers commented on the poor image quality, with a suboptimal slice profile of 2.9-mm thickness and a 340-cm field of view.



View larger version (104K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 4A. 47-year-old female renal donor whose preoperative MR angiogram was misinterpreted. Targeted maximum-intensity-projection image of three-dimensional gadolinium-enhanced MR angiogram (TR/TE, 5.0/2.0; flip angle, 20°) shows single left renal artery with early extrahilar branching (solid arrow) occurring 1.7 cm from left renal artery ostium. Small accessory artery (open arrow) is faintly seen.

 


View larger version (112K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 4B. 47-year-old female renal donor whose preoperative MR angiogram was misinterpreted. Targeted maximum-intensity-projection image obtained at slightly more anterior position than A shows 3-mm accessory branch (arrow) arising from aorta superior to dominant artery that was overlooked on MR imaging but seen at time of surgery. Arterial reconstruction was performed before anastomosis with recipient iliac artery.

 

Vascular anomalies were described on MR angiography as involving the arterial or venous system in 34 patients, with complete concordance seen with the surgical findings in 29 patients and discrepancy in five.

Arterial Anomalies
Twenty-nine patients had multiple renal arteries or early extrahilar branching of the renal arteries identified on MR angiography.

Isolated right renal artery anomalies were seen on MR angiography in eight patients. Of these, five patients had two right renal arteries identified on MR angiography, and three had early extrahilar branching. Only one of these patients had the right kidney harvested because of the complex left renal vein anatomy and the finding of an accessory right renal artery that was confirmed in this patient. The remaining seven patients had the left kidney removed, and the findings of a single left renal artery and vein were confirmed at surgery.

Bilateral artery anomalies were seen on MR angiography in eight patients, with supernumerary arteries seen in seven and early extrahilar branching in one. All of these patients had laparoscopic left nephrectomy, with confirmation of the findings seen on MR angiography in seven of eight and a discrepant result in one. In this patient, bilateral dual renal arteries were described on initial MR angiography, but they were not seen at left nephrectomy. Rather, a single left renal artery and a small circumaortic left renal vein were seen. Both interpreters saw these structures retrospectively. The initial MR angiography was misinterpreted as showing small accessory branches supplying each kidney, when in fact there was early venous opacification of the retroaortic component of the left renal vein (Fig. 5A,5B,5C).



View larger version (114K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 5A. 35-year-old male potential donor whose preoperative MR angiogram was misinterpreted. Maximum-intensity-projection image obtained from MR angiogram (TR/TE, 5.0/2.0; flip angle, 20°) was initially interpreted as showing bilateral accessory renal arteries entering renal hila. However, at blinded retrospective analysis, this finding was seen to represent single renal arteries bilaterally (solid arrows) with early opacification of retroaortic component of circumaortic left renal vein (open arrows).

 


View larger version (47K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 5B. 35-year-old male potential donor whose preoperative MR angiogram was misinterpreted. Axial reconstructed image shows main renal arteries (arrows).

 


View larger version (105K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 5C. 35-year-old male potential donor whose preoperative MR angiogram was misinterpreted. Venous phase targeted maximum-intensity-projection image shows vessels (arrows) entering inferior vena cava.

 

Isolated left renal artery anomalies were seen on MR angiography in 12 patients, with accessory renal arteries seen in eight, early extrahilar branching in three, and both of these findings in one patient. Of these 12 patients, surgery confirmed the MR findings in eight, and discrepant findings were identified in four patients.

Prospective and retrospective MR angiography in the first of these four patients revealed a dominant left renal artery entering the renal hilum and a tiny capsular branch originating from the left common iliac artery supplying the lower left renal pole. This vessel was not confirmed at surgery.

In another patient, a 3-mm accessory left renal artery was prospectively described as originating from the aorta and extending into the renal hilum. This finding was not confirmed at surgery. On retrospective analysis, both reviewers described a small arterial branch arising from the aorta, but they could not confidently show its relationship to the renal parenchyma (Fig. 6A,6B).



View larger version (92K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 6A. 57-year-old woman in whom small accessory left renal artery was seen on MR angiography but not confirmed at laparoscopic nephrectomy. Targeted maximum-intensity-projection image of interpolated three-dimensional MR angiogram (TR/TE, 4.6/1.8; flip angle, 30°) shows small arterial branch (arrow) arising from aorta.

 


View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 6B. 57-year-old woman in whom small accessory left renal artery was seen on MR angiography but not confirmed at laparoscopic nephrectomy. Multiplanar reconstruction shows small branch (arrow) leading toward left kidney. This vessel could not be seen entering hilum or renal parenchyma and thus was described as possible accessory vessel. At surgery, single left renal artery was seen, with no accessory vessels identified.

 

In the third patient, early extrahilar branching of the left renal artery was seen on initial MR angiography with a very short common origin, measuring approximately 5 mm from the renal ostium. Both examiners at retrospective analysis held to this interpretation. At surgery, two separate ostia were identified from the aorta.

Prospective MR angiography in the fourth patient revealed the findings of a malrotated kidney with a horizontal axis. Two left renal arteries were seen: one supplied the upper pole and a second artery was thought to arise from the inferior mesenteric artery and supply the lower pole (Fig. 7A,7B,7C,7D). Other imaging findings were suggestive of stenosis of the upper left renal artery. On angiography, the upper renal artery was seen with no definite stenosis, but the lower renal artery was not identified. At surgery, two left renal arteries were seen, but the lower renal artery originated from the aorta itself, rather than from the inferior mesenteric artery. Because of the position and length of the surgical staple placed at laparoscopic surgery, focal stenosis of the upper left renal artery could not be confirmed. At review, both examiners agreed that the origin of the lower accessory artery could not definitively be described because the volume of acquisition did not completely include the origin of the inferior mesenteric artery.



View larger version (135K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 7A. 37-year-old female renal donor in whom accessory left renal artery was missed on conventional angiography. Targeted maximum-intensity-projection interpolated three-dimensional MR angiogram (TR/TE, 4.6/1.8; flip angle, 30°) shows left kidney lying in horizontal plane. Dual arterial supply is seen, with an upper pole artery (solid arrow) and a slightly larger lower pole artery (open arrow).

 


View larger version (111K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 7B. 37-year-old female renal donor in whom accessory left renal artery was missed on conventional angiography. Targeted maximum-intensity-projection of interpolated three-dimensional MR angiogram shows upper pole artery with early extrahilar branching and area of suspected ostial stenosis (arrow).

 


View larger version (103K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 7C. 37-year-old female renal donor in whom accessory left renal artery was missed on conventional angiography. Targeted maximum-intensity-projection of interpolated three-dimensional MR angiogram shows accessory left renal artery supplying the lower pole (arrow), assumed to be arising from inferior mesenteric artery.

 


View larger version (110K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
 
Fig. 7D. 37-year-old female renal donor in whom accessory left renal artery was missed on conventional angiography. Angiogram shows upper left renal artery (arrow), but lower branch was not detected. At surgery, both left renal arteries were seen, but lower vessel originated from aorta rather than from inferior mesenteric artery, which was seen arising more inferiorly.

 

Venous Anomalies
Venous anomalies involving the left-sided venous structures were identified on preoperative MR imaging in seven patients: Three patients had a circumaortic left renal vein, one patient had a retroaortic left renal vein, one patient had three left renal veins merging anteriorly to the aorta, one patient had a duplicated inferior vena cava, and one patient had a prominent lumbar vein entering the left renal vein. In six patients, the findings were confirmed at the time of laparoscopic resection of the left kidney. In the patient with a trifurcation of the left renal veins, the right kidney was chosen as the site for harvesting because of the complex venous anatomy.

Ureteric Anomalies and Parenchymal Abnormalities
No significant anomalies were detected at the time of laparoscopy, although two patients were reported to have bifid renal pelves on MR imaging. This finding was not noted at the time of surgery.

Statistical Analysis
If complete concordance between surgical findings and MR imaging findings is used in analysis, the statistical results are as follows, with 95% confidence levels given in parentheses: for depiction of all arterial anomalies, MR angiography has a sensitivity of 89.4% (78.7%, 97.9%) and specificity of 94.1% (76.5%, 100%), with an accuracy of 90.6% (81.3%, 96.9%). For all venous anomalies, MR angiography has a sensitivity of 98.3% (93.2%, 100%) and specificity of 100% (80.0%, 100%) for all, with an accuracy of 98.4% (93.8%, 100%). In comparing the interpolated versus noninterpolated MR angiography techniques, we found no significant difference between the two groups of patients in the detection of vascular anomalies.


Discussion
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 
MR angiography has many advantages compared with other modalities used for renal imaging. It provides diagnostic information without the risks associated with catheterization in conventional angiography. Specifically, it reduces potential complications associated with an iodinated contrast agent, such as allergic reaction or nephrotoxicity, and there is no exposure to ionizing radiation. Because of the convenience of a short outpatient visit and associated cost savings, MR imaging is attractive for the evaluation of renal donors [8, 9].

Surgical correlation between the use of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy and preoperative evaluation with CT angiography has been documented by Del Pizzo et al. [11]. In their study, CT arteriography was 96% accurate in identifying the arterial anatomy before surgery. In addition, the venous anatomy was identified accurately in 97% of the patients. They suggest that CT angiography is accurate enough to be used as a single modality for the evaluation of renal donors. Others have also recommended the use of CT angiography as an effective and accurate modality to be used independently for the evaluation of potential donors [12].

Recent studies have found gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography to have high rates of accuracy and to be comparable to conventional angiography and CT angiography in the evaluation of living renal donors for open nephrectomy. In a recent study, Halpern et al. [13] compared the effectiveness of CT angiography and MR angiography in the preoperative evaluation of living renal donors. In their study, of the 18 patients who had surgical correlation available, MR imaging missed only one of the 23 arteries transplanted. Additionally, two small arteries were suggested on CT but not on MR imaging, and these vessels were not found during nephrectomy. Buzzas et al. [9] determined gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography to be 100% accurate in evaluating the renal vascular anatomy in 15 patients for open nephrectomy. In a study by Low et al. [8], 22 patients were evaluated with gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography, and the results were compared with those found during conventional angiography and open nephrectomy. They found 100% accuracy in identifying the renal arteries in all patients. Bakker et al. [14] have also described the advantage of gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography in a study of 24 living renal donors, with 100% accuracy in the detection of main and accessory renal arteries.

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is gaining favor as a minimally invasive alternative to open techniques of renal donor harvesting. Both arterial and venous vessels must be identified and, in particular, possible branching and accessory vasculature must be known before laparoscopic nephrectomy. This information is important because of the technical challenges associated with the procedure and the limited surgical field of view. Therefore, an accurate and effective preoperative evaluation is necessary, and anything short of this can lead to surgical complications and injury to the patient or the organ being harvested.

Our results show the capability of gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography to delineate the arterial and venous anatomy with a high level of accuracy in patients who are candidates for laparoscopic nephrectomy. Furthermore, patients tolerate the procedure well, and it is convenient to schedule them for this minimally invasive outpatient test rather than conventional angiography and excretory urography. Our surgeons have found the anatomic detail provided by MR imaging to be satisfactory for selection of the site for harvest. The MR angiographic images are presented in a format similar to conventional angiography, with multiplanar reconstruction images also available to show complex anatomy.

Our study has some limitations. First, our accuracy rates reflect only the findings from the single harvested kidney. We could not analyze the contralateral nonharvested kidney. Second, we did not attempt to quantify the exact caliber and length of vessels or the ureteric anatomy. Furthermore, the imaging technique was not consistent because the technologists and the junior physicians who often were responsible for monitoring the study had various levels of experience. When we reviewed the cases with discrepant findings, we were able to see that a learning curve exists in the interpretation of renal MR angiography and that most of the misinterpretations occurred during the early part of the study. Furthermore, although we did not retrospectively analyze the quality of all the MR angiographic images, review of the discrepant cases revealed the importance of optimizing image acquisition parameters of slice thickness and field of view and the problems that may be encountered with venous contamination. Some centers advocate the use of a timed bolus for all MR angiographic examinations, but it is our experience that venous contamination and the inconsistent quality of subtraction images make it preferable to use a fixed delay in these generally young and healthy living donors.

We considered any discrepancy between MR imaging and surgery as a false-positive or false-negative finding in calculating the accuracy rates of MR imaging. It is clear, however, that from a clinical point of view, some differences do not alter surgical management. The detection of an early extrahilar renal artery branch on MR angiography that is noted as two separate renal artery ostia at laparoscopic nephrectomy does not alter the surgical approach: both are treated as two separate renal arteries, as was done in one of our patients. Information about a suspected early extrahilar branch can prove valuable to the transplantation surgeon in surgical planning—for selection of the harvest site and for determination of the number of anastomoses that will be required.

In one patient, MR angiography was able to show a second renal artery supplying the lower pole in a malrotated kidney, a finding that was missed on conventional angiography. The origin of this vessel was from the lower abdominal aorta rather than from the inferior mesenteric artery, which was excluded from the lower aspect of the volume of the acquisition. Regardless, the findings on MR angiography were important in surgical planning, especially because this accessory vessel was seen neither prospectively nor retrospectively on conventional angiography. In two other patients, vessels were described on MR angiography as being 2- to 3-mm accessory arteries, but they were not seen at surgery. In a third patient, a 3-mm accessory artery was missed on MR angiography but seen at laparoscopy. This vessel was anastomosed with the dominant artery using a GORE-TEX patch (W. L. Gore, Flagstaff, AZ), and the reconstructed vessel was used in the anastomosis with the iliac artery. Review of these images revealed the tiny vessels, but visualization of their exact relationship to the renal parenchyma was difficult despite multiplanar reformatting. These cases show the limitations of spatial resolution and the importance of optimizing imaging parameters.

The case of the final patient with discrepant findings illustrates the learning curve involved in interpretation of renal MR angiography: Although the prospective evaluation reported bilateral duplicated renal arteries, retrospective analysis of this case by both examiners more than 2 years after the initial reading was correctly interpreted as venous contamination of a circumaortic renal vein that created an image that simulated supernumerary renal arteries.

In conclusion, renal MR imaging with gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography is an accurate and minimally invasive technique for obtaining a complete preoperative evaluation of renal donors. It has multiple advantages over other means of evaluation and, more important, it provides the necessary detail to allow harvest-site selection for laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Continued experience with interpretation and identification of vascular anatomy and the optimizing of imaging techniques should continue to improve accuracy rates in preoperative assessment.


References
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and Methods
Results
Discussion
References
 

  1. Sasaki TM, Finelli F, Bugarin E, et al. Is laparoscopic donor nephrectomy the new criterion standard? Arch Surg 2000;135:943 -947[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Neimatallah MA, Dong Q, Schoenberg SO, Cho KJ, Prince MR. Magnetic resonance imaging in renal transplantation. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;10:357 -368[Medline]
  3. Gourlay WA, Yucel EK, Hakaim AG, et al. Magnetic resonance angiography in the evaluation of living related renal donors. Transplantation 1995;60:1363 -1366[Medline]
  4. Meyers SP, Talagala SL, Totterman S, et al. Evaluation of the renal arteries in kidney donors: value of three-dimensional phase-contrast MR angiography with maximum-intensity-projection or surface rendering. AJR 1995;164:117 -121[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Debatin JF, Sostman HD, Knelson M, Argabright M, Spritzer CE. Renal magnetic resonance angiography in the preoperative detection of super-numerary renal arteries in potential kidney donors. Invest Radiol 1993;28:882 -889[Medline]
  6. Toki K, Takahara S, Kokado TY, et al. Comparison of CT angiography with MR angiography in the living renal donor. Transplant Proc 1998;30:2998 -3000[Medline]
  7. Tsuda K, Murakami T, Kim T, et al. Helical CT angiography of living renal donors: comparison with 3D Fourier transformation phase contrast MRA. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1998;22:186 -193[Medline]
  8. Low RN, Martinez AG, Steinberg SM, et al. Potential renal transplant donors: evaluation with gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography and MR urography. Radiology 1998;207:165 -172[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Buzzas GR, Shield CF, Pay NT, Neuman MJ, Smith JL. Use of gadolinium-enhanced, ultrafast, three-dimensional, spoiled gradient-echo magnetic resonance angiography in the preoperative evaluation of living renal allograft donors. Transplantation 1997;27:1734 -1737
  10. Nelson HA, Gilfeather M, Holman JM, Nelson EW, Yoon HC. Gadolinium-enhanced breathhold three-dimensional time-of-flight renal MR angiography in the evaluation of potential renal donors. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1999;10:175 -181[Medline]
  11. Del Pizzo JJ, Sklar GN, You-Cheong JW, Levin B, Krebs T, Jacobs SC. Helical computerized tomography arteriography for evaluation of live renal donors undergoing laparoscopic nephrectomy. J Urol 1999;162:31 -34[Medline]
  12. Smith PA, Ratner LE, Lynch FC, Corl FM, Fishman EK. Role of CT angiography in the preoperative evaluation for laparoscopic nephrectomy. RadioGraphics 1998;18:589 -601[Abstract]
  13. Halpern EJ, Mitchell DG, Wechsler RJ, Outwater EK, Moritz MJ, Wilson GA. Preoperative evaluation of living renal donors: comparison of CT angiography and MR angiography. Radiology 2000;216:434 -439[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Bakker J, Lightenberg G, Beek FJA, van Reedt Dortland RWH, Hene RJ. Preoperative evaluation of living renal donors with gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography. Transplantation 1999;67:1167 -1172[Medline]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
D. V. Sahani, N. Rastogi, A. C. Greenfield, S. P. Kalva, D. Ko, S. Saini, G. Harris, and P. R. Mueller
Multi-Detector Row CT in Evaluation of 94 Living Renal Donors by Readers with Varied Experience
Radiology, June 1, 2005; 235(3): 905 - 910.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. Kawamoto, R. A. Montgomery, L. P. Lawler, K. M. Horton, and E. K. Fishman
Multidetector CT Angiography for Preoperative Evaluation of Living Laparoscopic Kidney Donors
Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2003; 180(6): 1633 - 1638.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jha, R. C.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, L. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jha, R. C.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, L. B.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS