Effect of iodinated contrast material on post-operative eGFR when administered during renal mass ablation

• Published in: European radiology 2021-08, Vol.31 (8), p.5490-5497
• Main Authors: Curci, Nicole E., Triche, Benjamin L., Abel, E. Jason, Bhutani, Gauri, Maciolek, Kimberly A., Dreyfuss, Leo D., Allen, Glenn O., Caoili, Elaine M., Davenport, Matthew S., Wells, Shane A.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Ablation; Biopsy; Diagnostic Radiology; Epidermal growth factor receptors; Glomerular filtration rate; Imaging; Informed consent; Internal Medicine; Interventional; Interventional Radiology; Intravenous administration; Kidney cancer; Kidneys; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Model matching; Multivariate analysis; Neuroradiology; Radio frequency; Radiology; Rank tests; Regression analysis; Renal cell carcinoma; Tumors; Ultrasound
• ISSN: 0938-7994; 1432-1084
• DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-07613-y

Objective To evaluate the effect of intravenous iodinated contrast on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) when administered immediately after thermal ablation of clinically localized T1a (cT1a) renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Methods This HIPAA-compliant, dual-center retrospective study was performed under a waiver of informed consent. Three hundred forty-two consecutive patients with cT1a biopsy-proven RCC were treated with percutaneous ablation between January 2010 and December 2017. Immediate post-ablation contrast-enhanced CT was the routine standard of care at one institution (contrast group), but not the other (control group). One-month pre- and 6-month post-ablation eGFR were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test or the Kruskal-Wallis test. Multivariate linear regression was used to determine the effect of contrast on eGFR. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed for all patients with a logistic model using patient, tumor, and procedural covariates. Results In total, 246 patients (158 M; median age 69 years, IQR 62–74) were included. Median tumor diameter (2.4 vs 2.5, p = 0.23) and RENAL nephrometry scores (6 vs 6, p = 0.92), surrogates for ablation zone size, were similar. Baseline kidney function was similar for the control and contrast groups, respectively (median eGFR: 70 vs 74 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , p = 0.29). There was an expected mild decline in eGFR after ablation ( control : 70 vs 60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , p < 0.001; contrast : 75 vs 71 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , p = 0.001). Intravenous iodinated contrast was not associated with a decline in eGFR on multivariate linear regression (1.91, 95% CI - 3.43–7.24, p = 0.46) or 1:1 propensity score-matched model (- 0.33, 95% CI - 6.81–6.15, p = 0.92). Conclusion Intravenous iodinated contrast administered during ablation of cT1a RCC has no effect on eGFR. Key Points • Intravenous iodinated contrast administered during thermal ablation of clinically localized T1a renal cell carcinoma has no effect on kidney function. • Thermal ablation of clinically localized T1a renal cell carcinoma results in a mild decline in kidney function. • A decline in kidney function is similar for radiofrequency and microwave ablation of clinically localized T1a renal cell carcinoma.