Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Appropriateness of Renal Angioplasty. The ANPARIA Software: A Multidisciplinary Expert Panel Approach

  • Clinical Investigation
  • Published:
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty (PTRA) is an invasive technique that is costly and involves the risk of complications and renal failure. The ability of PTRA to reduce the administration of antihypertensive drugs has been demonstrated. A potentially greater benefit, which nevertheless remains to be proven, is the deferral of the need for chronic dialysis. The aim of the study (ANPARIA) was to assess the appropriateness of PTRA to impact on the evolution of renal function. A standardized expert panel method was used to assess the appropriateness of medical treatment alone or medical treatment with revascularization in various clinical situations. The choice of revascularization by either PTRA or surgery was examined for each clinical situation. Analysis was based on a detailed literature review and on systematically elicited expert opinion, which were obtained during a two-round modified Delphi process. The study provides detailed responses on the appropriateness of PTRA for 1848 distinct clinical scenarios. Depending on the major clinical presentation, appropriateness of revascularization varied from 32% to 75% for individual scenarios (overal 48%). Uncertainty as to revascularization was 41% overall. When revascularization was appropriate, PTRA was favored over surgery in 94% of the scenarios, except in certain cases of aortic atheroma where sugery was the preferred choice. Kidney size >7 cm, absence of coexisting disease, acute renal failure, a high degree of stenosis (≥70%), and absence of multiple arteries were identified as predictive variables of favorable appropriateness ratings. Situations such as cardiac failure with pulmonary edema or acute thrombosis of the renal artery were defined as indications for PTRA. This study identified clinical situations in which PTRA or surgery are appropriate for renal artery disease. We built a decision tree which can be used via Internet: the ANPARIA software (http://www.chu-clermontferrand.fr/anparia/). In numerous clinical situations uncertainty remains as to whether PTRA prevents deterioration of renal function.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Plouin PF, Chatellier G, Darne B, Raynaud A (1998) Blood pressure outcome of angioplasty in atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis: a randomized trial. Essai Multicentrique Medicaments vs Angioplastie (EMMA) Study Group. Hypertension 31:823–829

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Webster J, Marshall F, Abdalla M, et al. (1998) Randomised comparison of percutaneous angioplasty vs continued medical therapy for hypertensive patients with atheromatous renal artery stenosis. Scottish and Newcastle Renal Artery Stenosis Collaborative Group. J Hum Hypertens 12:329–335

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. van Jaarsveld BC, Krijnen P, Pieterman H, et al. (2000) The effect of balloon angioplasty on hypertension in atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis. Dutch Renal Artery Stenosis Intervention Cooperative Study Group. N Engl J Med 342:1007–1014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Textor SC (1996) Atherosclerotic renovascular disease as a cause of end-stage renal disease: cost considerations. Blood Purif 14:305–314

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Rimmer JM, Gennari FJ (1993) Atherosclerotic renovascular disease and progressive renal failure. Ann Intern Med 118:712–719

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Greco BA, Breyer JA (1997) Atherosclerotic ischemic renal disease. Am J Kidney Dis 29:167–187

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Guzman RP, Zierler RE, Isaacson JA, Bergelin RO, Strandness DE Jr (1994) Renal atrophy and arterial stenosis. A prospective study with duplex ultrasound. Hypertension 23:346–350

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Dean RH, Tribble RW, Hansen KJ, O’Neil E, Craven TE, Redding JF 2nd (1991) Evolution of renal insufficiency in ischemic nephropathy. Ann Surg 213:446–455, discussion 455–456

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hansen KJ (1994) Prevalence of ischemic nephropathy in the atherosclerotic population. Am J Kidney Dis 24:615–621

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Shanley PF (1996) The pathology of chronic renal ischemia. Semin Nephrol 16:21–32

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Mailloux LU, Napolitano B, Bellucci AG, Vernace M, Wilkes BM, Mossey RT (1994) Renal vascular disease causing end-stage renal disease, incidence, clinical correlates, and outcomes: a 20-year clinical experience. Am J Kidney Dis 24:622–629

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Scoble J (1995) The epidemiology and clinical manifestations of atherosclerotic renal artery disease. In: Novick ASJ, Hamilton G (eds) Renal vascular disease. W. B. Saunders, London, pp 303–314

    Google Scholar 

  13. Preston RA, Epstein M (1997) Ischemic renal disease: an emerging cause of chronic renal failure and end-stage renal disease. J Hypertens 15:1365–1377

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Harding MB, Smith LR, Himmelstein SI, et al. (1992) Renal artery stenosis: prevalence and associated risk factors in patients undergoing routine cardiac catheterization. J Am Soc Nephrol 2:1608–1616

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Swartbol P, Parsson H, Thorvinger B, Norgren L (1994) To what extent does peripheral vascular disease and hypertension predict renal artery stenosis? Int Angiol 13:109–114

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Caps MT, Perissinotto C, Zierler RE, et al. (1998) Prospective study of atherosclerotic disease progression in the renal artery. Circulation 98:2866–2872

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Scoble JE, Hamilton G (1990) Atherosclerotic renovascular disease. BMJ 300:1670–1671

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Weibull H, Bergqvist D, Bergentz SE, Jonsson K, Hulthen L, Manhem P (1993) Percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty versus surgical reconstruction of atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis: a prospective randomized study. J Vasc Surg 18:841–850, discussion 850–852

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bakker J, Goffette PP, Henry M, et al. (1999) The Erasme study: a multicenter study on the safety and technical results of the Palmaz stent used for the treatment of atherosclerotic ostial renal artery stenosis. CardioVasc Interv Radiol 22:468–474

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. van de Ven PJ, Kaatee R, Beutler JJ, et al. (1999) Arterial stenting and balloon angioplasty in ostial atherosclerotic renovascular disease: a randomised trial. Lancet 353:282–286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Radermacher J, Chavan A, Bleck J, et al. (2001) Use of Doppler ultrasonography to predict the outcome of therapy for renal-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 344:410–417

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Textor SC, Wilcox CS (2001) Renal artery stenosis: a common, treatable cause of renal failure? Annu Rev Med 52:421–442

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Safian RD, Textor SC (2001) Renal-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 344:431–442

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Bernstein SJ, Kosecoff J, Gray D, Hampton JR, Brook RH (1993) The appropriateness of the use of cardiovascular procedures. British versus U.S. perspectives. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 9:3–10

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. McGlynn EA, Naylor CD, Anderson GM, et al. (1994) Comparison of the appropriateness of coronary angiography and coronary artery bypass graft surgery between Canada and New York State. JAMA 272:934–940

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Pilpel D, Fraser GM, Kosecoff J, Weitzman S, Brook RH (1992) Regional differences in appropriateness of cholecystectomy in a prepaid health insurance system. Public Health Rev 20:61–74

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Burnand B, Vader JP, Froehlich F, et al. (1998) Reliability of panel-based guidelines for colonoscopy: an international comparison. Gastrointest Endosc 47:162–166

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Vader JP, Burnand B, Froehlich F, et al. (1997) Appropriateness of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: comparison of American and Swiss criteria. Int J Qual Health Care 9:87–92

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Brook RH, Kosecoff JB, Park RE, Chassin MR, Winslow CM, Hampton JR (1988) Diagnosis and treatment of coronary disease: comparison of doctors’ attitudes in the USA and the UK. Lancet 1:750–753

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Fitch K, Bernstein SJ, Aguilar MD, et al. (2001) The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method user’s manual. MR 1269, DGXII RE. RAND Health/RAND Europe

  31. Kahn KL, Kosecoff J, Chassin MR, et al. (1988) Measuring the clinical appropriateness of the use of a procedure. Can we do it? Med Care 26:415–422

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Shekelle PG, Kahan JP, Bernstein SJ, Leape LL, Kamberg CJ, Park RE (1998) The reproducibility of a method to identify the overuse and underuse of medical procedures. N Engl J Med 338:1888–1895

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Plouin PF, Alanore AL (1999) Management of the patient with atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis. New information from randomized trials. Nephrol Dial Transplant 14:1623–1626

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Vader JP, Burnand B, Froehlich F, Dubois RW, Bochud M, Gonvers JJ (1999) The European Panel on Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE): project and methods. Endoscopy 31:572–578

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Vader JP, Froehlich F, Dubois RW, et al. (1999) European Panel on the Appropriateness of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EPAGE): conclusion and WWW site. Endoscopy 31:687–694

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Brook RH, Chassin MR, Fink A, Solomon DH, Kosecoff J, Park RE (1986) A method for the detailed assessment of the appropriateness of medical technologies. Int J Qual Health Care 2(1):53–63

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Naylor CD (1998) What is appropriate care? N Engl J Med 338:1918–1920

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Uder M, Humke U (2005) Endovascular therapy of renal artery stenosis: Where do we stand today? CardioVasc Interv Radiol 28(2):139–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The project was funded by a national public grant from the French Ministry of Health (National Hospital Clinical Research Program 1997). We gratefully acknowledge the participation of the following clinical experts in the process: Xavier Barral, vascular surgery, Saint-Etienne; Alain Barret, vascular surgery, Toulouse; Jean-Paul Beregi, radiology, Lille; Louis Boyer, radiology, Clermont-Ferrand; Issam Farah, vascular surgery, Grenoble; Albert Fournier, nephrology, Amiens; Francis Joffre, radiology , Toulouse; Michel Lacombe, vascular surgery, Paris; Denis Lyonnet, radiology, Lyon; Alain Meyrier, nephrology, Paris; Bruno Moulin, nephrology, Strasbourg; Pierre-François Plouin, cardiology, Paris; Alain Raynaud, radiology, Paris; Bernard Waeber , nephrology, Lausanne.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CHU de Clermont-Ferrand, Hôtel-Dieu, Service d’épidémiologie, économie de la santé et prévention, 58 rue Montalembert, 63003, Clermont-Ferrand Cedex 01, France

    Laurent Gerbaud, Géraud Manhes, Juliette Debourse, Gérald Gouby & Phyllis-Yvonne Glanddier

  2. Université d’Auvergne, Faculté de Médecine, 28 place Henri Dunant, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France

    Laurent Gerbaud, Phyllis-Yvonne Glanddier, Louis Boyer & Patrice Deteix

  3. CHU de Clermont-Ferrand, Hôpital Gabriel Montpied, Service de radiologie, 58 rue Montalembert, 63003, Clermont-Ferrand Cedex 01, France

    Louis Boyer

  4. CHU de Clermont-Ferrand, Hôpital Gabriel Montpied, Service de néphrologie, 58 rue Montalembert, 63003, Clermont-Ferrand Cedex 01, France

    Patrice Deteix

  5. Institut Universitaire de Médecine Sociale et Préventive, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Université de Lausanne, 17 rue du Bugnon, CH-1005, Lausanne, Switzerland

    John-Paul Vader

  6. INSERM, ERIM EA 3295 ERI 14, Clermont-Ferrand, France

    Louis Boyer

Authors
  1. Laurent Gerbaud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Géraud Manhes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Juliette Debourse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gérald Gouby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Phyllis-Yvonne Glanddier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. John-Paul Vader
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Louis Boyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Patrice Deteix
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Louis Boyer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gerbaud, L., Manhes, G., Debourse, J. et al. The Appropriateness of Renal Angioplasty. The ANPARIA Software: A Multidisciplinary Expert Panel Approach. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 31, 1059–1068 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-007-9178-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-007-9178-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation