RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of endovascular management in iatrogenic renal injuries with regard to clinical status on follow-up and requirements for repeat angiography and embolization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included patients who were referred for endovascular management of significant hemorrhage following an iatrogenic injury. Data was recorded from the Picture Archiving and Communication system (PACS) and electronic medical records. The site and type of iatrogenic injury, imaging findings, treatment, angiography findings, embolization performed, clinical status on follow-up, and requirement for repeat embolization were recorded. The outcomes were clinical resolution, nephrectomy, or death. Clinical findings were recorded on follow-up visits to the clinic. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Seventy patients were included in this study between January 2000 and June 2012. A bleeding lesion (a pseudoaneurysm or arteriovenous fistula) was detected during the first angiogram in 55 patients (78.6%) and was selectively embolized. Fifteen required a second angiography as there was no clinical improvement and five required a third angiography. Overall, 66 patients (94.3%) showed complete resolution and 4 patients (5.7%) died. Three patients (4.3%) underwent nephrectomy for clinical stabilization even after embolization. There were no major complications. The two minor complications resolved spontaneously. CONCLUSIONS: Angiography and embolization is the treatment of choice in iatrogenic renal hemorrhage. Upto 20% of initial angiograms may not reveal the bleed and repeat angiography is required to identify a recurrent or unidentified bleed. The presence of multiple punctate bleeders on angiography suggests an enlarging subcapsular hematoma and requires preoperative embolization and nephrectomy.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate potential donor kidneys with asymptomatic calculi detected during screening, and the management of the calculus before, during and after transplantation, as with fewer live donors, marginal kidneys and donors are a significant subgroup in renal transplantation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five live-related donors, with one incidentally detected calculus during their routine evaluation, were accepted for transplantation. Of these, three were detected only on spiral computed angiography. There was no biochemical evidence of a metabolic abnormality or history of stone disease. One donor had elective lithotripsy and another nephrolithotomy under ultrasonographic control immediately after perfusion. The others were transplanted with the calculus in situ. Ureteric reimplantation was by the Leadbetter-Politano technique over a JJ stent. RESULTS: One recipient patient passed the calculus within 4 h of stent removal. The follow-up ultrasonogram at 3 months showed a stone in only one recipient. In the others, the calculus could not be seen after stent removal. The maximum follow-up was 2 years and graft function has remained normal in all. CONCLUSIONS: Voluntary kidney donors with one calculus incidentally detected on routine evaluation form a unique group and can be accepted for transplantation in selected cases. Careful follow-up of the donor and recipient is essential, with early intervention if necessary.
