Traumatic renal artery dissection: from imaging to management
Clinical Radiology, ISSN: 0009-9260, Vol: 76, Issue: 2, Page: 153.e17-153.e24
2021
- 7Citations
- 16Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations7
- Citation Indexes6
- Policy Citations1
- Policy Citation1
- Captures16
- Readers16
- 16
Review Description
Injury to the renal artery following blunt trauma is detected increasingly due to widespread and early use of multidetector computed tomography (CT), but optimal treatment remains controversial as no guidelines are available. This review illustrates the spectrum of imaging findings of traumatic renal artery dissection based on our experience, with the aim of understanding the physiopathology of ischaemic damage to the kidney, and the process of choosing the best therapeutic strategy (conservative, endovascular, surgical). Five main patterns of traumatic renal artery dissection are described: avulsion of renal hilum; dissection of the segmental renal branches; preocclusive main renal artery dissection; renal artery stenosis without flow limitation; thrombogenic renal artery intimal tear. In the polytrauma patient, management depends on various factors (haemodynamic status, associated lesions, time of diagnosis) rather than on the degree of renal artery stenosis. Non-operative management (NOM) is the preferred option in case of non-flow-limiting dissection of the renal artery and angio-embolisation is an important adjunct to NOM in cases of active bleeding. Embolisation of the renal artery stump may be the best option in cases of occlusive dissection, as catheter manipulation carries a high risk of vessel rupture. The therapeutic window for kidney revascularisation in cases of flow-limiting dissection of main renal artery may be variable. Endovascular stenting >4 h after trauma should be performed only if residual flow with preserved parenchymal perfusion is detected at angiography. Antiplatelet therapy administration is recommended in cases of stenting, but conditioned by the bleeding risk of the patient.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0009926020303858; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2020.08.029; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85091685158&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32993880; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0009926020303858; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2020.08.029
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know