4.7 Article

Revascularization of swine renal artery stenosis improves renal function but not the changes in vascular structure

期刊

KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL
卷 78, 期 11, 页码 1110-1118

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1038/ki.2010.142

关键词

renal artery stenosis; renal hypertension; renovascular disease; revascularization

资金

  1. NIH [DK-73608, DK-77013, HL-77131, PO1HL-085307]
  2. Fondation Transplantation (France)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Renal revascularization by percutaneous transluminal angioplasty improves blood pressure and stenotic kidney function in selected groups of patients, but the reversibility of intrarenal and microvascular remodeling remains unknown. Here, we tested the hypothesis that renal angioplasty improves the function and structure of renal microcirculation in experimental chronic renal artery stenosis. Stenotic kidney function, hemodynamics, and endothelial function were assessed in vivo in pigs after 10 weeks of unilateral renal artery stenosis. Renal microvascular remodeling, angiogenic pathways, and fibrosis were measured ex vivo. Angioplasty and stenting carried out 4 weeks before measurement decreased blood pressure, improved glomerular filtration rate, and improved microvascular endothelial function. It also promoted the expression of angiogenic factors and decreased renal apoptosis due to stenosis, compared with a sham intervention. The spatial density of renal microvessels, however, was partially improved after angioplasty. Renal blood flow was incompletely restored compared with the kidneys of sham-treated animals, as was interstitial fibrosis. Renal microvascular media-to-lumen ratio remained unchanged by angioplasty. Thus, our study shows that revascularization of a stenotic renal artery restores the glomerular filtration rate and renal endothelial function 4 weeks later. Renal hemodynamics and structure, however, are incompletely resolved. Kidney International (2010) 78, 1110-1118; doi: 10.1038/ki.2010.142; published online 12 May 2010

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

4.7
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