Joint Program in Nuclear Medicine
Radionuclide Evaluation of Renal Function
Chandra Dass, MD
J. Anthony Parker, MD PhD
January 28, 1997
Presentation
A 32 year old male status post multiple episodes of pyelonephritis with
subsequent obstruction and right nephrostomy tube placement underwent an
intravenous urogram (IVU) which revealed severe dilatation
of the pelvicalyceal system on the right side and normal functioning left
kidney. Subsequent nephrostogram revealed obstruction of the proximal right
ureter near the UPJ, probably congenital. A renal scan was performed to
help direct therapy.
Imaging Findings
The renal scan revealed reduced function on the
right. The uptake in the kidneys from 1 to 3 minutes on the renogram
curves was used to calculate the split renal function; the left-to-right
ratio was 85% to 15%. Given that he remained symptomatic and that the right
kidney had poor function, a nephrectomy rather than a pyeloplasty was performed.
Discussion
Several radionuclide techniques have been developed for the evaluation
of renal pathology, e.g. flow/perfusion study, global/split renal clearance
(Glomerular Filtration Rate, Effective Renal Plasma Flow, Tubular Extraction
Rate) studies, renal transit times, and techniques for the evaluation of
renovascular hypertension and obstructive uropathy. Renal clearance in
the form of GFR or ERPF are the commonly used parameters in the initial
and followup evaluation of several renal diseases. The various methods
available for the estimation of renal clearance can be broadly classified
in one of three categories: classic methods - those in which both urine
collection and plasma sampling are required (either with non-radioactive
or radioactive substances); those in which plasma sampling alone is required
(plasma disappearance curve); gamma camera methods with or without blood
sampling (from the amount of tracer extracted from the plasma by the kidneys).
The classical methods are not used clinically because they are expensive,
time consuming, requires steady state plasma concentration and extremely
accurate urine collection.
Radionuclides
The methods of GFR and ERPF are identical except for the time scales and
the radiopharmaceuticals used. Analogs of inulin yield GFR; analogs of
PAH yield ERPF. Of the various radiopharmaceuticals available, Tc-99m DTPA
& Cr-51 EDTA are used for the estimation of GFR; I-123 Hippuran for
ERPF; Tc-99m MAG3 for TER (1). Because ERPF tracers are excreted much more
rapidly than GFR agents, their plasma clearance can be measured accurately
in less than an hour; comparable accuracy in GFR requires several hours.
Methods
The most accurate estimation of clearance using radiotracers involves determination
of both the initial rapid and the late slow components of the plasma disappearance
curve with multiple blood samples and analyzing the data either by the
Stewart-Hamilton type formulation or by fitting the curve to two exponential
terms (2). These techniques are used as a standard to which technically
simple methods are compared. If one delays plasma sampling until redistribution
of the tracer throughout the body compartments occurs, the plasma disappearance
curve becomes a monoexponential function that can be defined by obtaining
two plasma samples (3). To simplify the procedure further, single plasma
sample methods that relate the activity of the tracer remaining in the
plasma at a specified time after injection to either a reference curve
derived from an index population (empirical methods) or to the slow monoexponential
portion of the plasma disappearance curve (compartmental methods) have
been developed (4,5).
In contrast to plasma sampling techniques, imaging methods determine
the clearance from the amount of radiotracer extracted from the plasma
by the kidneys during the uptake phase of the renogram. These techniques
either require the knowledge of the plasma activity during this period
obtained from a region-of-interest drawn over a vascular region and a single
plasma sample, or determine clearance directly from the renal uptake alone.
In the latter case, the renal uptake is then related to the clearance by
a regression formula obtained from an index population. The accuracy of
those methods that do not include a plasma sample has been a matter of
recent controversy (2).
Relative Accuracy
The spectrum of accuracy varies widely based on the method chosen to calculate
clearance. The complete plasma clearance curve is the most accurate but
requires multiple blood samples. The two blood sample method is only slightly
more accurate than the one sample method, while the gamma camera techniques
are less accurate than all of the plasma methods. However, the gamma-camera
techniques have been shown to be more accurate than creatine clearance
and further more, do not require either plasma or urine samples. Methods
using plasma sampling yield only global function estimates, while gamma
camera methods measure both global and differential renal functions. The
best results are obtained by combining both approaches; i.e., single blood
sample for total clearance and camera acquisition for the relative contribution
of each kidney to the total function. In patient management, the question
of relative contribution of each kidney to the total renal function is
often more important than the global function itself. For this reason the
results are expressed in relative units (% of total function) rather than
absolute units (ml/min). This information cannot be easily obtained from
any non-radionuclide method. At very low levels of renal function urinary
clearance is felt to be more accurate, and in patients with edema or ascites
multiple sample approach is required.
Conclusions
The simplified radionuclide methods for quantifying renal function are
estimates of function, with clinically acceptable levels of error. The
error of the estimates typically increases in the setting of very poor
renal function, but so does the error associated with the presently used
biochemical tests, such as creatine clearance. To be used clinically, a
method need not be highly accurate; it is more important it is reproducible.
One problem limiting the more general acceptance of radionuclide method
is cost, which is often greater than that of the biochemical tests used.
Radionuclide methods are most useful in patients in whom urine collection
is difficult, among them poorly cooperative patients, children, and in
those with renal insufficiency. Camera based methods offer another advantage
- quantitation of individual renal function (6).
References
1. Blaufox MD, Aurell M, Bubeck B, et al. Report of the Radionuclides in
Nephrology Committee on Renal Clearance. J Nucl Med 1996; 37:1883-1890.
2. Summerville DA, Potter CS, Treves TS. The use of Radiopharmaceuticals
in the measurement of Glomerular Filtration Rate: A Review. Nucl Med Annual
1990:191- 221.
3. Rootwelt K, Falch D, Sjokvist R. Eur J Nucl Med 1980;5:97-102.
4. Tauxe WH, Dubovsky EV (eds) in Nuclear Medicine in Clinical urology
and Nephrology 1985, Appleton-Century- Crofts. Pp 61-106.
5. Russell CD, Dubovsky EV. Measurement of Renal function with Radionuclides.
J Nucl Med 30:2053-2057, 1989.
6. Thrall JH, Ziessman HA.(eds) in Nuclear Medicine -The Requisites.
1995, Mosby-Year Book, Inc. Pp 293-297.
Click here to go to Joint
Program in Nuclear Medicine home page and Copyright notice.
J. Anthony Parker, MD PhD, Tony_Parker@bidmc.harvard.edu