NYMC Faculty Publications
Optimal Renal Artery-Aorta Angulation Revealed by Flow Simulation
Author Type(s)
Faculty
DOI
10.1159/000530169
Journal Title
Kidney & Blood Pressure Research
First Page
249
Last Page
259
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
1-1-2023
Department
Physiology
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In the circulatory system, the vessel branching angle may have hemodynamic consequences. We hypothesized that there is a hemodynamically optimal range for the renal artery's branching angle. METHODS: Data on the posttransplant kinetics of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were analyzed according to the donor and implant sides (right-to-right and left-to-right position; n = 46). The renal artery branching angle from the aorta of a randomly selected population was measured using an X-ray angiogram (n = 44). Computational fluid dynamics simulation was used to elucidate the hemodynamic effects of angulation. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Renal transplant patients receiving a right donor kidney to the right side showed faster adaptation and higher eGFR values than those receiving a left donor kidney to the right side (eGFR: 65 ± 7 vs. 56 ± 6 mL/min/1.73 m2; p < 0.01). The average branching angle on the left side was 78° and that on the right side was 66°. Simulation results showed that the pressure, volume flow, and velocity were relatively constant between 58° and 88°, indicating that this range is optimal for the kidneys. The turbulent kinetic energy does not change significantly between 58° and 78°. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that there is an optimal range for the renal artery's branching angle from the aorta where hemodynamic vulnerability caused by the degree of angulation is the lowest, which should be considered during kidney transplantations.
Recommended Citation
Csonka, D., Kalmár Nagy, K., Szakály, P., Szukits, S., Bogner, P., Koller, A., Kun, S., Wittmann, I., Háber, I. E., & Horváth, I. G. (2023). Optimal Renal Artery-Aorta Angulation Revealed by Flow Simulation. Kidney & Blood Pressure Research, 48 (1), 249-259. https://doi.org/10.1159/000530169