Loading…

Sonographic Venous Velocity Index Identifies Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease and Severe Diastolic Dysfunction

Abstract Objective Diagnosing cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) continues to remain challenging in outpatient practice. In this study, we investigate whether a newly developed venous velocity ultrasound index (VVI) can differentiate between patients with CRS an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Ultrasound international open 2018-10, Vol.4 (4), p.E142-E148
Main Authors: Meier, Markus, Jabs, Wolfram Johannes, Guthmann, Maria, Geppert, Gesa, Aydin, Ali, Nitschke, Martin
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Objective Diagnosing cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) continues to remain challenging in outpatient practice. In this study, we investigate whether a newly developed venous velocity ultrasound index (VVI) can differentiate between patients with CRS and patients with CKD of other cause or normal renal function (NRF). Methods Patients with CRS (n = 30), CKD (n=30), and NRF (n=30) were included in the study. For each patient, duplex ultrasound scans of intrarenal segmental veins were retrospectively analyzed. The VVI was calculated from the renal venous doppler curve as the ratio of the maximal positive venous velocity to the maximal negative venous velocity. Patients with CRS were compared to age-matched controls with NRF and to GFR-matched controls with CKD. Results: The GFRs of patients with CRS and those with CKD were comparable (26.4±5 and 25.6±7 ml/min/m2), as was the age in patients with CRS and NRF (6 ±12 years and 68±16 years, respectively). There was no significant difference in ejection fraction between patients with CRS and those with CKD (44.2±6.2% vs. 47.4 ±7.2), but there was a significant decrease compared to those with NRF (52.6 ±5.1, p
ISSN:2509-596X
2199-7152
DOI:10.1055/a-0684-9483