4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Changes in intrarenal oxygenation as evaluated by BOLD MRI in a rat kidney model for radiocontrast nephropathy

Journal

JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
Volume 13, Issue 5, Pages 744-747

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.1103

Keywords

renal medulla; oxygenation; radiocontrast; acute renal failure; MRI

Funding

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK053221, R01 DK053221-03, DK18078, DK53221] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The pathogenesis of radiocontrast nephropathy is poorly understood. In an animal model, inhibition of the synthesis of nitric oxide and prostaglandins appears to predispose rats to severe renal injury following the administration of radiocontrast. Here we have investigated whether administration of radiocontrast, as well as changes in renal medullary oxygenation following pharmacologic inhibition of nitric oxide and prostaglandin synthesis, might be evaluated by blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) MRI. Nineteen anesthetized (Inactin 100 mg/kg) rats were studied. BOLD MRI measurements were performed following administration of L-NAME (N-nitro-L-arginine methyl ester, 10 mg/kg), Indomethacin (10 mg/kg), and a radiocontrast agent (sodium iothalamate 60%, 6 mL/kg). Marked sequential changes in medullary R-2*, presumably reflecting decline in medullary pO(2), were noted after each of the pharmacological interventions employed. These results, obtained by noninvasive MRI, are consistent with prior direct recordings Of pO(2) and doppler flow in the rat renal medulla after administration of L-NAME, Indomethacin and iothalamate. Medullary oxygenation in rats was reduced by inhibition of the synthesis of prostaglandins and nitric oxide, as well as by intravenous injection of radiocontrast agents. BOLD AM can noninvasively evaluate changes in medullary oxygenation in rats that appear to predispose acute renal failure. (C) 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available