Modern radiology diagnostics methods for assessment of renal perfusion in patients with urinary stone disease


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Urinary stone disease is the current issue for healthcare system worldwide. High prevalence of urinary stone disease (at least 5% of the population of developed countries) determines clinical significance of the studying of its etiology and pathogenesis, improving of diagnostic methods and novel treatment technologies. The development of endoscopic devices, creation of new eswl machines and improvement of endourology interventions under X-ray guidance allowed to solve the problem of surgical treatment. Therefore, one of the actual issue is the choice of X-ray method for predicting and evaluating of treatment efficiency in patients with urinary stone disease. The changes of renal blood flow depend on urodynamic disturbances, stone location and size, the duration of disease, complications, patient’s age. Therefore, for comprehensive studying of renal function the hemodynamics evaluation is needed. In this review the advantages, drawbacks and perspective on developing of different radiologic methods for renal hemodynamic assessment are given.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

K. A Aleksandrova

I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Email: ksenia_alexandrova@mail.ru
Assistant at the Department of Radiology and radiation therapy

V. I Rudenko

Scientific Research Institute of Uronephrology and Reproductive Health, Urologic Department and Clinic of I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University

Email: rudenko-vadim@rambler.ru
Dr.Med.Sci, professor at the Department of Urology, Head of the Department of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy

N. S Serova

I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Corresponding member of RAS, Dr.Med.Sci, Director of the Institute of Electronic Medical Education of Sechenov University, professor at the Department of Radiology and radiation therapy

M. A Gazimiev

Scientific Research Institute of Uronephrology and Reproductive Health, Urologic Department and Clinic of I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University

Dr.Med.Sci, Deputy Director of the Research Institute for Uronephrology and Human Reproductive Health, Moscow, Russia; Executive Director of the Russian Society of Urology (ROU)

L. B Kapanadze

I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of Minzdrav of Russia (Sechenov University)

Email: lidakap@mail.ru
Assistant at the Department of Radiology and radiation therapy

References

  1. Knoll T. Epidemiology, Pathogenesis, and Pathophysiology of Urolithiasis. Eur. Urol. Suppl. 2010;9:802-806.
  2. Indridason O.S., Birgisson S., Edvardsson V.O., Sigvaldason H., Sigfusson N., Palsson R. Epidemiology of kidney stones in Iceland: a population-based study. Scand. J. Urol. Nephrol. 2009; 40(3): 215-220.
  3. Ramello A., Vitale C., Marangella M. Epidemiology of nephrolithiasis. J. Nephrol. 2000;13:45-50.
  4. Smith A.C. Jr., Hanley J.M., Saigal C.S. Urologie Diseases in America Project: Prevalence of kidney stones in the United States. Eur Urol. 2012;62:160-165.
  5. Stamatelou K.K., Francis M.E., Jones CA. et al. Time trends in reported prevalence of kidney stones in the United States. Kidney Int. 2003;63:1951-1952.
  6. Taylor E.N., Stampfer M.J., Curhan G.C. Obesity, weight gain, and the risk of kidney stones. JAMA. 2008;293(4):455-462.
  7. Chang I.H., Kim K.D., Moon Y.T., Kim T.H., Myung S.C., Kim Y.S., Lee J.Y. Possible Relationship between Metabolic Syndrome Traits and Nephrolithiasis: Incidence for 15 Years According to Gender. Korean J. Urol. 2011;52(8):548-553.
  8. Brikowski T.H., Lotan Y., Pearle M.S. Climate-related increase in the prevalence of urolithiasis in the United States. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2008;105(28):9841-9846.
  9. Zoghby Z.M., Lieske J.C., Foley R.N. et al. Urolithiasis and the risk of ESRD. Clin J. Am Soc Nephrol. 2012;7:1409-1415.
  10. Alexander R.T., Hemmelgarn B.R., Wiebe N. et al. Kidney stones and kidney function loss: a cohort study. BMJ. 2012;345:52-87.
  11. Liu Y., Li S., Zeng Z. et al. Kidney stones and cardiovascular risk: a metaanalysis of cohort studies. Am J. Kidney Dis. 2014;64:402-410.
  12. Аполихин О.И., Сивков А.В., Бешлиев Д.А., Солнцева Т.В., Комарова В.А. Анализ уронефрологической заболеваемости в Российской Федерации по данным официальной статистики. Экспериментальная и клиническая урология. 2010;1:4-11
  13. Руденко В.И. Мочекаменная болезнь. Актуальные вопросы диагностики и выбора метода лечения. Дисс. д-ра мед. наук. М., 2004
  14. Павлов С.М. Лечение больных с двухсторонним нефролитиазом дистанционной литотрипсией. М., 1997
  15. Тиктинский О.Л., Александров В.П. Мочекаменная болезнь. СПб.: «Питер». 2000;384
  16. Фокас В.А. Роль фармакологических функциональных проб в обследовании больных обструктивной нефропатией. Матер. 2-го съезда ассоциации специалистов ультразвуковой диагностики в медицине. М., 1995. 111 c.
  17. Емельянова Н.В., Чехонацкая М.Л., Россоловский А.Н., Кондратьева О.А., Седова Л.Н., Абрамова А.П. Возможности ультразвуковой диагностики мочекаменной болезни. Саратовский научно-медицинский журнал. 2011;7(3): 718-723
  18. Емельянова Н.В., Чехонацкая М.Л., Россоловский А.Н., Кондратьева О.А. Изменение гемодинамических показателей у больных мочекаменной болезнью до и после проведения дистанционной литотрипсии. Диагностическая и интервенционная радиология. 2011;2:407
  19. Handa Rajash K., Willis Lynn R., Evan Andrew P., Connors Bret A. Effect of Shock Wave Lithotripsy on Renal Hemodynamics AIP Conference Proceedings 1049. 2008;249. doi: 10.1063/1.2998031
  20. Садыков Э.Н. Влияние дистанционной пьезоэлектрической нефролитотрипсии на почечную гемодинамику у больных уролитиазом. Казанский медицинский журнал. 2001;82(3):184-186
  21. Белый Л.Е. Патофизиологические нарушения у больных с острой обструкцией верхних мочевых путей: дисс. канд. мед. наук. С. 2003.
  22. Емельянова Н.В., Чехонацкая М. Л., Россоловский А. Н, Кондратьева О.А., Седова Л.Н., Абрамова А.П.. Ультразвуковая диагностика мочекаменной болезни. Бюллетень медицинских интернет-конференций. 2013;3(4):826-830
  23. Беленков Ю.Н., Беличенко О.И., Пустовитова Т.С. МРТ почек и надпочечников у здоровых людей. Мед. Радиология. 1989;3:3-8
  24. Бешлиев Д.А., Никитинская Л.П., Дзеранов Н.К., Голованов С.А. Функция почек в отдалённый период после ДЛТ. Тезисы докладов пленума правления Российского общества урологов. Сочи, 2003. с. 75-76
  25. Correas J.M., Bridal L., Lesavre A., Mejean A., Claudon M., Helenon O. Ultrasound contrast agents: properties, principles of action, tolerance, and artifacts. Eur Radiol. 2001;11:1316-1328.
  26. Nanda N.C. History of echocardiographic contrast agents. Clin Cardiol. 1997;20(S1):7-11.
  27. Bertolotto M. Value of contrast - enhanced ultrasonography for detecting renal infarcts proven by contrast enhanced CT. A feasibility study. Eur. Radiol. 2008;18:376-383.
  28. Correas J.M. Contrast - enhanced ultrasonography: renal applications. J. Radiol. 2003;84:2041-2054.
  29. Piscaglia F., Nolsoe C., Dietrich C. et al. The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations on the clinical practice of contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS): update 2011 on non-hepatic applications. Ultraschall Med. 2011;33:33-59.
  30. Correas J.M., Bridal L., Lesavre A., Mejean A., Claudon M., Helenon O. Ultrasound contrast agents: properties, principles of action, tolerance, and artifacts. Eur Radiol. 2001;11:1316-1328.
  31. Lucidarme O., Correas J.M., Bridal S.L., Berger G. Quantification of ultrasound contrast agent response: comparison of continuous wave Doppler and power Doppler to backscattered radiofrequency data. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2001;27:1379-1386.
  32. Lucidarme O., Franchi-Abella S., Correas J.M., Bridal S.L., Kurtisovski E., Berger G. Blood flow quantification with contrast-enhanced US: ‘‘entrance in the section’’ phenomenon-phantom and rabbit study. Radiology. 2003;228:473-479.
  33. Dietrich C.F., Averkiou M.A., Correas J.M., Lassau N., Leen E., Piscaglia F. An EFSUMB introduction into dynamic contrast- enhanced ultrasound (DCE-US) for quantification of tumour perfusion. Ultraschall in der Medizin. 2012;33:344-351.
  34. Новиков Н.Е. Контрастно-усиленные ультразвуковые исследования. История развития и современные возможности. REJR. 2012;2(1):20-28
  35. Назаренко Г.И., Хитрова А.Н., Краснова Т.В. Допплерографические исследования уронефрологии. Руководство. М., Медицина. 2002;36
  36. Salgado O., Garcia R., Henriquez C., Rosales B., Sulbaran P. Severely elevated intrarenal arterial impedance and abnormal venous flow pattern in a normal functioning kidney graft. Transplant Proc. 2003;35(5):1772-1174.
  37. de Toledo L.S., Martinez-Berganza Asensio T., Cozcolluela Cabrejas R., de Grcgorio Ariza MA., Pardina Cortina P., Ripa Saldias L. Doppler duplex ultrasound in renal colic. Eur J. Radiol. 1996;23(2):143-148.
  38. Geavlete P., Georgescu D., Cauni V., Nita G. Value of duplex Doppler ultrasonography in renal colic. Eur Urol. 2002;41(1):71-78.
  39. Gottlieb R.H., Luhmann K., Oates RP. Duplex ultrasound evaluation of normal native kidneys and native kidneys with urinary tract obstruction. J. Ultrasound Med. 1989;8(l1):609-611.
  40. Karadeniz T., Topsakal M., Eksioglu A., Ariman A., Basak D. Renal hemodynamics in patients with obstructive uropathy evaluated by color Doppler sonography. Eur Urol. 1996;29(3):298-330.
  41. Coley B.D., Arellano R.S., Talner L.B., Baker K.G., Peterson T., Mattrey R.F. Renal resistive index in experimental partial and complete ureteral obstruction. Acad Radiol. 1995;2(5):373-378.
  42. Brkljaeic B., Drinkovic I., Sabljar-Matovinovie M., Soldo D., Morovic- Vergles J., Vidjak V., Hebrang A. Intrarenal duplex Doppler sonographic evaluation of unilateral native kidney obstruction. Ultrasound Med. 1994;13(3):197-204.
  43. Аляев Ю.Г., Руденко В.И., Газимиев М.А. Мочекаменная болезнь. Современные вопросы диагностики и лечения. М.: ГЭОТАР-Медиа, 2010. С. 25-28
  44. Altenberger U.I., Morelli J.N., Schoenberg S.O., Michaely H.J. Assessment of the kidneys: magnetic resonance angiography, perfusion and diffusion. Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. 2011;13:70.
  45. Bokacheva L., Rusinek H., Zhang J.L., Lee V.S. Assessment of renal function with dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N. Am. 2008;16:597-611.
  46. Weimann H.J. Характеристика Gd-DTPA/димеглюмина магневиста. Вестник рентгенологии и радиологии. 1994;2:9-14.
  47. Ринк П.А., Синицын В.Е. Перспективы развития контрастных средств для MP-томографии. Медицинская визуализация. 1996;1:17-30
  48. Ринк П.А., Синицын В.Е. Контрастные средства для КТ и МРТ. Основные принципы. Вестник рентгенологии и радиологии. 1995;6:51-59
  49. Felix R., Heshiki A., Hosten H., Hricak H. Magnevist. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publication. 1994. 196 p.
  50. Свиридов Н.К., Шимановский H.JI. Нефротоксичность рентгеноконтрастных средств. Вест, рентген, и радиол. 2001;1:46-49
  51. Аляев Ю.Г., Синицын В.Е., Григорьев Н.А. Магнитно-резонансная томография в урологии. Практическая медицина. М., 2005. C. 21-22
  52. Attenberger U.I., Morelli J.N., Schoenberg S.O., Michaely H.J. Assessment of the kidneys: magnetic resonance angiography, perfusion and diffusion. Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. 2011;13:70.
  53. Pollock Jeffrey M., et al. Arterial Spin Labeled MRI Perfusion Imaging: Clinical Applications. Magnetic resonance imaging clinics of North America. 2009;17(2):315-338.
  54. Detre J.A., Zhang W., Roberts D.A. et al. Tissue specific perfusion imaging using arterial spin labeling. NMR Biomed. 1994;7:75-82.
  55. Alsop D.C., Detre J.A. Multisection cerebral blood flow MR imaging with continuous arterial spin labeling. Radiology. 1998;208:410-416.
  56. Williams D.S., Detre J.A., Leigh J.S., Koretsky A.P. Magnetic resonance imaging of perfusion using spin inversion of arterial water. Proc Natl Acad Sci U. S. A. 1992;89:212-216.
  57. Deibler A.R., Pollock J.M., Kraft R.A., Tan H., Burdette J.H., Maldjian J.A. Arterial spin-labeling in routine clinical practice, part 1: technique and artifacts. AJNR Am J. Neuroradiol. 2008;29:1228-1234.
  58. Deibler A.R., Pollock J.M., Kraft R.A., Tan H., Burdette J.H., Maldjian J.A. Arterial spin-labeling in routine clinical practice, part 2: hypoperfusion patterns. AJNR Am J. Neuroradiol. 2008;29:1235-1241.
  59. Maldjian J.A., Laurienti P.J., Burdette J.H., Kraft R.A. Clinical implementation of spin-tag perfusion magnetic resonance imaging. J. Comput Assist Tomogr. 2008;32:403-406.
  60. Pollock J.M., Deibler A.R., West T.G., Burdette J.H., Kraft R.A., Maldjian J.A. Arterial Spin-Labeled Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Hyperperfused Seizure Focus: A Case Report. J. Comput Assist Tomogr. 2008;32:291-292.
  61. Pollock J.M., Deibler A.R., Whitlow C.T. et al. Manifestations of Hyper and Hypocapnia on Arterial Spin Labeled MRI Perfusion Imaging. AJNR Am J. Neuroradiol. 2008 In Press.
  62. Pollock J.M., Whitlow C.T., Deibler A.R. et al. Anoxic injury-associated cerebral hyperperfusion identified with arterial spin-labeled MR imaging. AJNR Am J. Neuroradiol. 2008;29:1302-1307.
  63. Deibler A.R., Pollock J.M., Kraft R.A., Tan H., Burdette J.H., Maldjian J.A. Arterial spin-labeling in routine clinical practice, part 3: hyperperfusion patterns. AJNR Am J. Neuroradiol. 2008;29:1428-1435.
  64. Pollock J.M., Deibler A.R., Burdette J.H., et al. Migraine associated cerebral hyperperfusion with arterial spin-labeled MR imaging. AJNR Am J. Neuroradiol. 2008;29:1494-1497.
  65. Michaely H.J., Schoenberg S.O., Ittrich C., Dikow R., Bock M., Guenther M. Renal disease: value of functional magnetic resonance imaging with flow and perfusion measurements. Invest Radiol. 2004;39:698-705.
  66. Fenchel M., Martirosian P., Langanke J., Giersch J., Miller S., Stauder N.I., Kramer U., Claussen C.D., Schick F. Perfusion MR Imaging with FAIR True FISP Spin Labeling in Patients with and without Renal Artery Stenosis: Initial Experience. Radiology. 2006;238(3):1013-1021.
  67. McCarthy C.J., Baliyan V., Kordbacheh H., Sajjad Z., Sahani D., Kambadakone A. Radiology of renal stone disease. Int J. Surg. 2016;36(D):638-646.
  68. Живоглядов Д.И., Шария М.А. Лучевые методы оценки перфузии Миокарда. REJR 2014;4(4):59-66
  69. Капанадзе Л.Б., Серова Н.С., Руденко В.И. Аспекты применения двухэнергетической компьютерной томографии в диагностике мочекаменной болезни. REJR 2017; 7(3):165-173. doi: 10.21569/2222-7415-2017-7-3-165-173
  70. Mazzei M.A., Squitieri N.C., Sani E., Guerrini S., Imbriaco G., Di Lucia D. et al. Differences in perfusion CT parameter values with commercial software upgrades: a preliminary report about algorithm consistency and stability. Acta Radiol. 2013;54:805-811.
  71. Grenier N., Cornelis F., Le Bras Y., Rigou G., Boutault J.R., Bouzgarrou M. Perfusion imaging in renal diseases. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2013;94:1313- 1322.
  72. Kambadakone A.R., Sahani D.V. Body perfusion CT: technique, clinical applications, and advances. Radiol Clin North Am. 2009;47:161-178.
  73. Dawson P. Functional imaging in CT. Eur J. Radiol. 2006;60:331-340.
  74. Petralia G., Preda L., D’Andrea G. et al. CT perfusion in solid-body tumours. Part I: technical issues. Radiol. Med. 2010;115:843-857.
  75. Patlak C.S., Blasberg R.G., Fenstermacher J.D. Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. J. Cereb. Blood Flow. Metab. 1983;3:1-7.
  76. Cai X.R., Zhou Q.C., Yu J., Feng Y.Z., Xian Z.H., Yang W.C., Mo X.K. Assessment of renal function in patients with unilateral ureteral obstruction using whole-organ perfusion imaging with 320-detector row computed tomography. PLoS One. 2015;10(4):e0122454. doi: 10.1371/journal. pone.0122454. eCollection 2015.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2018 Bionika Media

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies