Renal Perfusion, Oxygenation and Metabolism: The Role of Imaging.

Thanks to technical advances in the field of medical imaging, it is now possible to study key features of renal anatomy and physiology, but so far poorly explored due to the inherent difficulties in studying both the metabolism and vasculature of the human kidney. In this narrative review, we provide an overview of recent research findings on renal perfusion, oxygenation, and substrate uptake. Most studies evaluating renal perfusion with positron emission tomography (PET) have been performed in healthy controls, and specific target populations like obese individuals or patients with renovascular disease and chronic kidney disease (CKD) have rarely been assessed. Functional magnetic resonance (fMRI) has also been used to study renal perfusion in CKD patients, and recent studies have addressed the kidney hemodynamic effects of therapeutic agents such as glucagon-like receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2-i) in an attempt to characterise the mechanisms leading to their nephroprotective effects. The few available studies on renal substrate uptake are discussed. In the near future, these imaging modalities will hopefully become widely available with researchers more acquainted with them, gaining insights into the complex renal pathophysiology in acute and chronic diseases.

Myocardial perfusion reserve of kidney transplant patients is well preserved.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with endothelial dysfunction and increased cardiovascular mortality. Endothelial dysfunction can be studied measuring myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR). MPR is the ratio of stress and rest myocardial perfusion (MP) and reflects the capacity of vascular bed to increase perfusion and microvascular responsiveness. In this pilot study, our aim was to assess MPR of 19 patients with kidney transplant (CKD stages 2-3) and of ten healthy controls with quantitative [15O]H2O positron emission tomography (PET) method. RESULTS: Basal MP was statistically significantly higher at rest in the kidney transplant patients than in the healthy controls [1.3 (0.4) ml/min/g and 1.0 (0.2) ml/min/g, respectively, p = 0.0015]. After correction of basal MP by cardiac workload [MPcorr = basal MP/individual rate pressure product (RPP) × average RPP of the healthy controls], the difference between the groups disappeared [0.9 (0.2) ml/min/g and 1.0 (0.3) ml/min/g, respectively, p = 0.55)]. There was no difference in stress MP between the kidney transplant patients and the healthy subjects [3.8 (1.0) ml/min/g and 4.0 (0.9) ml/min/g, respectively, p = 0.53]. Although MPR was reduced, MPRcorr (stress MP/basal MPcorr) did not differ between the kidney transplant patients and the healthy controls [4.1 (1.1) and 4.3 (1.6), respectively, p = 0.8]. CONCLUSIONS: MP during stress is preserved in kidney transplant patients with CKD stage 2-3. The reduced MPR appears to be explained by increased resting MP. This is likely linked with increased cardiac workload due to sympathetic overactivation in kidney transplant patients.

Renal vascular resistance is increased in patients with kidney transplant.

BACKGROUND: Despite improvement in short-term outcome of kidney transplants, the long-term survival of kidney transplants has not changed over past decades. Kidney biopsy is the gold standard of transplant pathology but it's invasive. Quantification of transplant blood flow could provide a novel non-invasive method to evaluate transplant pathology. The aim of this retrospective cross-sectional pilot study was to evaluate positron emission tomography (PET) as a method to measure kidney transplant perfusion and find out if there is correlation between transplant perfusion and histopathology. METHODS: Renal cortical perfusion of 19 kidney transplantation patients [average time from transplantation 33 (17-54) months; eGFR 55 (47-69) ml/min] and 10 healthy controls were studied by [15 O]H2O PET. Perfusion and Doppler resistance index (RI) of transplants were compared with histology of one-year protocol transplant biopsy. RESULTS: Renal cortical perfusion of healthy control subjects and transplant patients were 2.7 (2.4-4.0) ml min- 1 g- 1 and 2.2 (2.0-3.0) ml min- 1 g- 1, respectively (p = 0.1). Renal vascular resistance (RVR) of the patients was 47.0 (36.7-51.4) mmHg mL- 1min- 1g- 1 and that of the healthy 32.4 (24.6-39.6) mmHg mL- 1min-1g-1 (p = 0.01). There was a statistically significant correlation between Doppler RI and perfusion of transplants (r = - 0.51, p = 0.026). Transplant Doppler RI of the group of mild fibrotic changes [0.73 (0.70-0.76)] and the group of no fibrotic changes [0.66 (0.61-0.72)] differed statistically significantly (p = 0.03). No statistically significant correlation was found between cortical perfusion and fibrosis of transplants (p = 0.56). CONCLUSIONS: [15 O]H2O PET showed its capability as a method in measuring perfusion of kidney transplants. RVR of transplant patients with stage 2-3 chronic kidney disease was higher than that of the healthy, although kidney perfusion values didn't differ between the groups. Doppler based RI correlated with perfusion and fibrosis of transplants.

The renal blood flow reserve in healthy humans and patients with atherosclerotic renovascular disease measured by positron emission tomography using [15O]H2O.

BACKGROUND: Microvascular function plays an important role in ARVD (atherosclerotic renovascular disease). RFR (renal flow reserve), the capacity of renal vasculature to dilate, is known to reflect renal microvascular function. In this pilot study, we assessed PET (positron emission tomography)-based RFR values of healthy persons and renal artery stenosis patients. Seventeen patients with ARVD and eight healthy subjects were included in the study. Intravenous enalapril 1 mg was used as a vasodilatant, and the maximum response (blood pressure and RFR) to it was measured at 40 min. Renal perfusion was measured by means of oxygen-15-labeled water PET. RFR was calculated as a difference of stress flow and basal flow and was expressed as percent [(stress blood flow - basal blood flow)/basal blood flow] × 100%. RESULTS: RFR of the healthy was 22%. RFR of the stenosed kidneys of bilateral stenosis patients (27%) was higher than that of the stenosed kidneys of unilateral stenosis patients (15%). RFR of the contralateral kidneys of unilateral stenosis patients was 21%. There was no difference of statistical significance between RFR values of ARVD subgroups or between ARVD subgroups and the healthy. In the stenosed kidneys of unilateral ARVD patients, stenosis grade of the renal artery correlated negatively with basal (p = 0.04) and stress flow (p = 0.02). Dispersion of RFR values was high. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to report [15O]H2O PET-based RFR values of healthy subjects and ARVD patients in humans. The difference between RFR values of ARVD patients and the healthy did not reach statistical significance perhaps because of high dispersion of RFR values. [15O]H2O PET is a valuable non-invasive and quantitative method to evaluate renal blood flow though high dispersion makes imaging challenging. Larger studies are needed to get more information about [15O]H2O PET method in evaluation of renal blood flow.

Low-dose acetylsalicylic acid and blood pressure control in drug-treated hypertensive patients.

BACKGROUND: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may increase blood pressure (BP) and potentially reduce the efficacy of several antihypertensive drugs. We evaluated the effect of low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) on BP control in drug-treated hypertensive patients in a primary care population. DESIGN/METHODS: Nine hundred and five successive patients aged 25­91 years (mean 65.5 years) from 15 health centers in south-west Finland were studied. The patients were on antihypertensive monotherapy (45.7%) or on combination therapy (54.3%). Office BP was measured twice with a 2-min interval after at least a 10-min rest using an ordinary sphygmomanometer. RESULTS: Patients receiving ASA (n = 246) showed lower diastolic BP (83.9 ± 9.0 vs. 87.0 ± 9.6 mmHg; P < 0.001) compared with those who were not using any NSAIDs (n = 659). No significant difference in systolic BP was observed between the groups. As a result, pulse pressure was slightly higher in the ASA group (66.9 ± 18.9 vs. 63.3 ± 17.7 mmHg, P = 0.01). Mean arterial pressure was lower in the ASA group (106.2 ± 10.6 vs. 108.1 ± 10.4 mmHg, P = 0.02). In a stepwise linear multivariate model, ASA remained a significant predictor of lower diastolic BP even after the adjustment with the confounding effects of age and sex. CONCLUSION: According to our population-based study low-dose ASA does not have deleterious effects on BP control in drug-treated hypertensive patients.