4.5 Article

Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse Measurement in Renal Transplantation A Prospective, Longitudinal Study With Protocol Biopsies

期刊

MEDICINE
卷 94, 期 39, 页码 -

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001590

关键词

-

资金

  1. Clinical Trials Center for Medical Devices at Severance Hospital [1-2010-0011]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (IF/TA) is a common cause of kidney allograft loss. Several noninvasive techniques developed to assess tissue fibrosis are widely used to examine the liver. However, relatively few studies have investigated the use of elastographic methods to assess transplanted kidneys. The aim of this study was to explore the clinical implications of the acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) technique in renal transplant patients.A total of 91 patients who underwent living donor renal transplantation between September 2010 and January 2013 were included in this prospective study. Shear wave velocity (SWV) was measured by ARFI at baseline and predetermined time points (1 week and 6 and 12 months after transplantation). Protocol biopsies were performed at 12 months.Instead of reflecting IF/TA, SWVs were found to be related to time elapsed after transplantation. Mean SWV increased continuously during the first postoperative year (P<0.001). In addition, mixed model analysis showed no correlation existed between SWV and serum creatinine (r=-0.2426, P=0.0771). There was also no evidence of a relationship between IF/TA and serum creatinine (odds ratio [OR]=1.220, P=0.7648). Furthermore, SWV temporal patterns were dependent on the kidney weight to body weight ratio (KW/BW). In patients with a KW/BW <3.5g/kg, mean SWV continuously increased for 12 months, whereas it decreased after 6 months in those with a KW/BW 3.5g/kg.No significant correlation was observed between SWV and IF/TA or renal dysfunction. However, SWV was found to be related to the time after transplantation. Renal hemodynamics influenced by KW/BW might impact SWV values.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据