Follow-up evaluation after renal artery bypass surgery with use of carbon dioxide arteriography and color-flow duplex scanning

Purpose: Postoperative evaluation of renal artery bypass grafts historically has been obtained by contrast renal arteriography before discharge from the hospital. Recent reports have advocated replacing arteriography with abdominal duplex scanning for evaluating and monitoring the integrity of renal artery bypasses. We propose a combination of these two techniques, which provides minimal risk to the patient and renal parenchymal function. Purpose: Between July 1, 1990, and Dec. 31, 1991, 17 patients (8 men, 9 women) underwent 24 renal artery bypasses for poorly controlled hypertension or deteriorating renal function. In the immediate postoperative period each patient underwent carbon dioxide (CO 2) renal arteriography to detect any technical defects and to define bypass graft anatomy. Subsequently, color-flow duplex scanning of the renal artery bypass grafts were done at 3-month intervals with the postoperative CO 2 arteriogram for baseline comparison. CO 2 arteriography clearly defined proximal/distal anastomotic anatomy, bypass conduit integrity, and bypass conduit runoff. Results: Procedural morbidity was zero because no hematomas developed and serum creatinine remained stable. Duplex scanning for a mean follow-up of 8.3 months revealed antegrade flow in 23 bypasses with peak systolic velocity of 60 to 100 cm/sec. One bypass graft had a peak systolic velocity greater than 150 cm/sec suggestive of a proximal anastomotic stenosis; however, the patient died before a repeat, verifying CO 2 arteriogram could be obtained. Recurrent hypertension developed in one patient with velocities less than 100/cm/sec, and repeat CO 2 arteriography revealed no evidence of graft or anastomotic stenosis. Conclusion: CO 2 arteriography and duplex scanning provide an accurate means of initially evaluating and subsequently monitoring renal artery bypass grafts, with minimal risk of renal or patient morbidity. (J V ASC S URG 1993;18:23-30.)