How

to manage renovascular
hypertension
An article from the e-journal of the ESC Council for Cardiology Practice
Vol. 13, N 8 - 09 Dec 2014

Dr. Emma Tintea
Dr. Elisabeta Badila, FESC

Renal artery stenosis must be considered in any patient with a history of severe or resistant
hypertension, especially in those associating a decline in renal function or significant
atherosclerosis in other vascular territories. Detailed here are the initial work-up, evaluation
and imaging that should be performed in all those suspected of renal artery stenosis, as well as
the intensive medical therapy, monitoring and possible revascularisation, according to the
latest trials, that will be necessary.
Table of contents
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
Stenosis
Etiology
Pathophysiology
Clinical clues
Diagnostic testing
Other diagnostic tools
Treatment
Medical management
Surgical revascularisation
Angioplasty
Clinical trials

CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
NOTES TO EDITOR
Hypertension

INTRODUCTION
A suspected case of renal hypertension's holds relative simplicity in theoretical terms yet it
masks a rather complicated situation in clinical practice. In theory, renal artery stenosis results
in increased blood pressure values and declined renal function; as a consequence, removal of
the obstruction (the stenosis) should allow proper hypertension (HTN) control and good
restoration of renal function.
In clinical practice, however, the physician must make difficult decisions, personalised for each
patient. Questions are:

When must we suspect RVH?

What is the standard protocol to manage such a patient?
Can we consider we have found the cause for the HTN and treat it once renal artery stenosis is
diagnosed?
Are these two coexisting clinical entities that share no causal link, and simply influence on each
other?
Should we, or not, turn to revascularisation therapy?
If so, which is the best technique surgery or angioplasty?
Where does pharmacologic therapy stand?

This paper aims to answer some of these questions, as an update to diagnostic and therapeutic
challenges in this field.

BACKGROUND
Renovascular hypertension (RVH) is the most frequent form of secondary hypertension. It is
most often diagnosed among elderly patients and has significant effects on prognosis and
patient outcomes. An increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) events and death (16% per year, six
times more than end-stage renal disease) in patients 67 years of age and older with a new
diagnosis of RVH was revealed on examination of Medicare records (1).
Renal artery stenosis causes clinical syndromes that go from asymptomatic obstruction
(incidental renal artery stenosis) to RVH and ischemic nephropathy. In turn, thes syndromes are
often complicated by accelerated CV disease - congestive heart failure, stroke and secondary
aldosteronism.
Strictly speaking though, renovascular hypertension can only be diagnosed in retrospect, based
on the reaction of blood pressure (BP) values to a given therapeutic intervention - to remove
the stenosis. Thus, RVH is correctly and properly diagnosed 6 to 12 weeks after an intervention,
when BP is lower than it was prior to the intervention, with the patient taking the same or
fewer antihypertensive medications.


STENOSIS
In contrast to the pathophysiology-based definition of RVH seen above, the diagnosis of renal
artery stenosis (RAS) takes into account several anatomical criteria; classically, RAS is diagnosed
when a >75% narrowing of the diameter of a main renal artery, or >50% luminal narrowing with
a poststenotic dilatation are found (2). The distinction between RVH and RAS is
important. There are patients with advanced RAS in whom BP values are normal, and RVH
patients who due to ischemic nephropathy presumably, necessitate surgical small kidney
removal yet who do not reach normalisation of BP values - only 25% of these patients do.
Atherosclerotic disease of renal arteries may progress to complete arterial occlusion. When the
entire renal parenchyma is affected (i.e., in bilateral stenosis or stenosis to a solitary kidney),
renal artery stenosis may cause severe deterioration of renal function, often referred to as
ischemic nephropathy. This represents an important consequence of atherosclerotic
renovascular HTN, which, in many cases, may remain undetected. It is a frequent cause of end-
stage renal disease and is associated with a poor prognosis even after initiation of renal
replacement therapy.

ETIOLOGY
Causes for renovascular HTN are:

Atherosclerosis and fibromuscular dysplasia.

Less frequent causes which may lead to or accelerate development of RVH include systemic
vasculitis, renal arterial aneurysm, arteriovenous fistula, systemic emboli generated during
endovascular manipulation, aortic dissection, renin-secreting renal tumor, extrinsic compression
of either kidney or renal artery due to tumors or metastases and subcapsular intrarenal
hematoma (3).

Atherosclerotic RAS is the predominant lesion detected in patients over 50 years of age; it
frequently affects the ostium and the proximal one-third of the renal artery's main branch.
Atherosclerosis accounts for nearly 90% of renovascular hypertension. Many individuals with
atherosclerotic renal artery lesions have years of preexisting essential hypertension, active
smoking history, and coexisting diabetes mellitus.
The true prevalence of atherosclerotic renal artery disease in the general population is
unknown. In selected populations displaying atherosclerotic disease of other vascular
territories, prevalence is around 10-30% (4). One must note that even among those in whom
RAS is documented, only in some of these patients does the stenosis have pathophysiological
significance, thus explaining the highly heterogeneous outcomes of studies investigating
benefits of renal revascularisation.
Fibromuscular dysplasia (FMD) is a noninflammatory, nonatherosclerotic vascular disease
that preferentially affects small - to medium - sized arteries. Most FMD lesions are caused by
medial fibroplasia, consisting of banded lesions in the mid portion of the renal arteries.

Fibromuscular dysplasia may generally occur in any vascular territory, including the coronary
bed, but usually affects the renal arteries. Most frequently fibromuscular dysplasia is located in
the distal two-thirds of the renal arteries, their secondary or distal branches. Screening
angiography in potential kidney donors indicates that such lesions can be asymptomatic and
may be detected in up to 3% to 6% of normotensive individuals (5). When they reach sufficient
hemodynamic severity to produce renovascular hypertension, they most commonly affect
women between 15 and 50 years of age. Screening angiography of a population with resistant
HTN showed a FMD prevalence of 16% (6).
Revascularisation, in most cases, restores blood pressure values, and thus cures HTN.
Fibromuscular dysplasia occurring as an isolated disease does usually not associate with renal
failure.

PATHOPHYSIOLOGY
To make a renovascular hypertension diagnosis, RAS evaluation is required but not sufficient.
When stenosis is severe enough (i.e., when it causes at least 75% reduction in diameter), renal
hypoperfusion and functional changes in the affected kidney may ensue, leading to activation
of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, which plays a central role in the development of
RVH. When the stenosis is due to atherosclerosis, however, it is sometimes difficult or
impossible to establish whether it is the stenosis that is causing the hypertension, or whether
the hypertension is preexisting essential hypertension. Under these circumstances, it may be
difficult to predict whether the revascularisation procedure will lower blood pressure.
The mechanism is different in unilateral or bilateral renal artery stenosis:
In significant unilateral stenosis the plasma renin activity increases as a result of ischemia
in the affected kidney. The activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RASS), leads
to excessive secretion of angiotensin II, with secondary vasoconstriction and aldosterone,
resulting in water and sodium retention. The mechanism was described in 1971 and has
been referred to since as "angiotensin-dependent hypertension (7). The reaction in the
contralateral kidney, the pressure diuresis, is however insufficient to counterbalance the
increase in BP values.
In the case of bilateral renal artery stenosis, the increase in angiotensin II and aldosterone
levels results in water and sodium retention; in the absence of a healthy kidney to balance it,
volume-dependent HTN develops and suppresses renin secretion. This hypertension can be
converted back to angiotensin II dependency by sodium and volume depletion. For example,
excessive diuretic therapy may reduce volemia, but restores renin secretion, activates the RASS,
which further inhibits sodium excretion, thus leading to resistance to diuretic therapy.


CLINICAL CLUES
Clinical settings in which RVH should be considered in the differential diagnosis:

Significant atherosclerosis in other vascular territories (is associated with atherosclerotic RAS);
Onset of HTN before the age of 30 (consider FMD) or after 55 years old (especially if there is no
family history of hypertension);
Abdominal bruit (especially diastolic component);
Worsening of previously controlled hypertension;
History of accelerated/malignant hypertension or refractory hypertension to an appropriate
three-drug regimen;
Unilateral small kidney; difference of >1.5 cm in length between the two kidneys (renal
ultrasound);
Rapid deterioration in renal function (spontaneous or in response to ACE inhibitor or ARB);
Recurrent congestive heart failure or flash pulmonary edema in a hypertensive patient,
especially when left ventricle ejection fraction is preserved;
Keith-Wegener-Barker grade III or IV fundi;
Angina without significant coronary artery disease in hypertensive patients.

DIAGNOSTIC TESTING
The screening tools developed for diagnosis of renovascular HTN are either based on
physiological parameters (e.g. renin activity or blood flow to each kidney), or on anatomic
parameters (CT angiography and MR angiography), while others combine some of each
(Doppler ultrasound, captopril scintigraphy). Useful noninvasive tools frequently used in clinical
practice are: duplex ultrasonography (DUS), CT angiography (CTA) and MR angiography (MRA).
Arteriography remains the gold standard to RAS diagnosis, however with a degree of
invasiveness which prevents it from becoming a screening tool.

Duplex ultrasonography
It has high sensitivity (82%) and high specificity (90%), and is relatively inexpensive. It also has
its limits the operator dependent variability and the technical difficulties in the case of obese
patients or in those with overlying bowel gas. There are significant renal artery stenoses of
accessory renal arteries which may lead to renovascular hypertension and are difficult to
identify in ultrasound studies. Furthermore, it may be negative in patients with FMD, making
other imaging modalities mandatory. It is often difficult to differentiate using Doppler studies
between a 50-70% vs a >70% stenosis, and thus the majority of ultrasonographers use a cut-off
value of 50% for significant stenoses. In general however, DUS is a reasonable screening
solution for patients in whom there is a clinical suspicion of atherosclerotic RAS. Significant RAS
stenosis is diagnosed in the presence of a velocity ratio between the renal artery and aorta
larger than 3.5. The resistivity index can be used to appreciate the benefit of possible future
renal revascularisation therapy: an index over 0.8 suggests renal parenchymal disease, which
will not improve with revascularisation. Furthermore, patients with kidneys 8 cm or less in

length have a low probability to benefit from revascularisation therapy. A more recent study
concluded that the resistivity index (and not post-procedural HTN) represents an independent
predictor of renal function and all-cause mortality in patients with RVH (8).
According to European Guidelines, DUS is recommended as the first-line imaging test to
establish the diagnosis of RAS (class I, LOE B) (9).

Computed tomographic angiography

This is a very efficient imaging modality to investigate RAS, allowing for simultaneous
evaluation of both the anatomic presence of a stenosis and also its physiologic effect on the
kidney (Figure 1). CTA has nonetheless its limitations: excess radiation, iodine contrast (with the
risk of inducing contrast nephropathy and limiting its use in patients without renal impairment),
and incorrect evaluation of severity in patients with significant artery calcification. The time to
reconstruct and interpret images is longer than for other screening tests. In the presence of
renal artery stents, CTA is the preferred noninvasive investigation technique. It is not widely
used for screening purposes and thus CTA has not been correlated with BP-lowering outcomes
after intervention (10).
CTA (in patients with creatinine clearance over 60 mL/min) is recommended to establish the
diagnosis of RAS according to the European Guidelines on the management of peripheral artery
disease (PAD) (class I, LOE B).

Magnetic resonance angiography

The method has the advantage of obtaining images similar to those acquired through
aortography. MRA can be useful to appreciate renal perfusion, even though this is not part of
routine evaluation. It has good specificity and sensibility 88% for both. Moreover, MRA does
not imply use of iodine contrast, which makes it useful in patients with impaired renal function.
However, in patients with significant decline in glomerular filtration rate one must be cautious,
as gadolinium administration has been associated with nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, a rare but
untreatable fibrosing condition that primarily affects the skin, but may affect also other organs
(11). MRA has a series of limitations: the evaluation of RAS is difficult in those with pre-existing
stents; there is a tendency to overestimate moderate stenoses (40-69%); it has reduced
accuracy in small, branch, and distal renal arteries; it cannot be carried out in claustrophobic
patients or in those with metallic prostheses, cardiac pacemakers; the high cost may also
represent a limitation.
Magnetic Resonance Angiography is recommended by the European Guidelines for the
management of PAD (in patients with creatinine clearance >30 mL/min) to establish the
diagnosis of RAS (Class I, LOE B).

Figure 1. Computed tomography angiography atherosclerotic left renal artery stenosis.



A hypertensive, diabetic insulin-dependent female patient with coronary heart disease 70%
stenosis on first segment of left anterior descending coronary, with uncontrolled hypertension.
CTA reveals an abdominal aorta with severe parietal calcifications. Main right renal artery
ostial and juxtaostial calcification, without significant stenosis. Left renal artery presents a 3
mm in length severe stenosis, 9 mm from its emergence from the aorta, with a 75% obstruction
on CT evaluation, with mild post-stenotic dilatation. (Images from authors' personal collection)

Figure 2. Digital substraction renal angiograms from the same patient as Fig. 1.
A Before angioplasty. B After left renal angioplasty.
(Images from authors' personal collection)

Angiography
Renal angiography is the gold standard for renal artery imaging. Nearly all authorities also
agree that, presuming all other criteria are met, individuals who have a very high absolute risk
of renal artery stenosis or renovascular hypertension should proceed directly to renal
angiography, rather than undergo an imperfect screening test. The limitations come from the
degree of invasiveness, which prevents it from becoming a screening tool, and the use of iodine
contrast which have the risk of inducing renal failure and anaphylaxis.
When the clinical index of suspicion is high and the results of non-invasive tests are
inconclusive, digital subtraction angiography is recommended as a diagnostic test (prepared for
intervention) to establish the diagnosis of RAS (class I, LOE C).

OTHER DIAGNOSTIC TOOLS

The intravenous pyelogram was one of the first diagnostic tests used for evaluation of RAS and
is no longer recommended because of its poor sensitivity and high false-positive rate.
Plasma renin activity has a low predictive value; its specificity increases with the administration
of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (conventionally, captopril is used), but with poor
results in case of bilateral RAS. Furthermore, the test is limited by the need to previously stop
administration of many of the main classes of antihypertensive drugs in order to obtain
unbiased results.
Captopril scintigraphy (CS) is useful for the diagnosis of unilateral RAS in patients with normal
renal function; it, too, requires interruption of antihypertensive medication. A few
retrospective analyses have suggested that CS results might predict BP outcomes after
angioplasty/surgery. Nevertheless, the 2005 American College of Cardiology/ American Heart
Association Guidelines do not recommend CS as a screening test for renovascular
hypertension (12).
Renal scintigraphy without captopril avoids intravenous contrast, but only has about a 74%
sensitivity and 77% specificity. It is now usually performed only after a captopril scan has been
interpreted as abnormal.
According to the latest ESC Guidelines on the management of PAD, Captopril renal scintigraphy,
selective renal vein renin measurements, plasma renin activity, and the captopril test are not
recommended as useful screening tests to establish the diagnosis of RAS (class III, LOE B).
In all, we cannot recommend any single, ideal noninvasive test. Rather, the choice of an initial
screening test should incorporate the availability and expertise at any given institution. In
addition, patient related factors such as body size, concomitant medication use, and underlying
renal function should be considered. However, the value of testing depends on the pretest
probability of disease.

TREATMENT
The purpose of therapy in patients with renal artery disease is to control blood pressure and
preserve renal function. Currently, there is ongoing controversy regarding therapeutic
management of patients with RAS, both regarding the method used for revascularisation and
its actual benefit in practice. If HTN control cannot be achieved or a decline in renal function is
evident, revascularisation should be more strongly considered. The table below shows the clues
that may help with this decision, personalised according to characteristics of each patient.

Table 1. Factors influencing patient selection for revascularisation (2)

Positive (favorable) response expected after revascularisation
Recurrent flash pulmonary edema
Refractory hypertension despite appropriate three-drug regimen

Positive (favorable) response expected after revascularisation

Progressive, unexplained decline in renal function
Acute, reversible increase in serum creatinine after ACE inhibitor or ARB
Recent institution of dialysis in a patient suspected of ischemic nephropathy
Renal resistive index <80 mmHg on Doppler US
Negative (unfavorable) response expected after revascularisation
BP <140/90 mmHg on fewer than three antihypertensive drugs
Normal renal function
Unilateral small kidney (<7.5 cm length)
History or clinical evidence of cholesterol embolization
Renal resistive index 80 mmHg on Doppler US
Heavy proteinuria (>1 gm/day)
More than 10 years history of hypertension
Renal artery stenosis < 70%

MEDICAL MANAGEMENT
Publication of results from most recent clinical trials indicate the intensification of
antihypertensive therapy and the control of additional risk factors (smoking cessation, glycemic
control, pharmacologic therapy using aspirin, statins) (13). All patients with atherosclerotic RAS
should be treated according to the European Guidelines on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention
(14).
Medical therapy remains the cornerstone of treatment for renal-artery stenosis (15). ACE
inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers and calcium channel blockers are effective in the
treatment of hypertension in the presence of unilateral RAS and may lead to slowing of the
progression of renal disease (class I, level B).
The major risk of current pharmacologic therapy resides in the decline of renal function, a

clinical situation often encountered when introducing an ACE inhibitor or ARB. These drugs are
efficient antihypertensives in 86-92% of RVH patients, usually in combination with a calcium
antagonist and a diuretic. ACEIs and ARBs are generally well tolerated, with only 5% of cases
requiring cessation during the first three months. A significant (over 30%) fall in GFR (or an over
0.5 mg/dL rise in serum creatinine) may be an indication to consider renal revascularisation.
ACE inhibitors and ARBs are contraindicated in the case of bilateral RAS and when this lesion
affects a single functional kidney.
There is evidence that thiazides, hydralazine, and beta-blockers are also effective in achieving
target blood pressure in individuals with RAS (16).

SURGICAL REVASCULARISATION
Currently, surgical revascularisation is seldom practiced as the number of angioplasty
procedures has been increasing. By-pass procedures from nonaortic donor sites (splenic, celiac,
mesenteric, or hepatic artery) are more agreeable than the traditional aortic-renal by-pass and
the renal endarterectomy (for technical and anatomic reasons). These procedures limit aortic
manipulation and minimize atherosclerotic emboli formation, with the disadvantage of an
increased perioperatory mortality rate (2-6%) mainly secondary to graft failures or other
complications of widespread atherosclerotic vascular disease.
Surgical revascularisation may be considered for patients undergoing surgical repair of the
aorta, patients with complex anatomy of the renal arteries, or after a failed endovascular
procedure (class IIb, level C).
A metaanalysis of 47 retrospective or nonrandomized studies compared the outcomes in
patients subjected to surgical revascularisation vs patients subjected to endovascular
procedures. The results showed similar technical success rates, better long-term BP control and
renal function, but slightly higher perioperative mortality (attributed to concomitant aortic
surgery) (17).

ANGIOPLASTY
The renal percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (RPTA) is an accepted and durable treatment
strategy when the etiology of RVH is fibromuscular dysplasia. The rate of restenosis varies in
the range of 5 to 11% after one year (18).
In atherosclerotic renal artery disease the role of interventional therapy is a subject of
controversy, as trials so far have not proven significant clinical benefits. Angioplasty for an ostial
lesion, for sequential stenoses of a single artery, or for stenoses in multiple renal arteries on the
same side, are all associated with an even poorer response.
Expert opinion, especially from the fields of Cardiology and Interventional Radiology, argue that
revascularisation offers the potential to improve or reverse renovascular hypertension, to
salvage or preserve the renal circulation and renal function, and to improve the management of
patients with refractory forms of congestive heart failure (19). Many nephrologists however
argue that renal revascularisation does not offer major benefits in the control of HTN and that
the periprocedural risk for complications is larger, including the less frequent renal function
decline secondary to atherosclerotic embolization. In observational series, technical failures

(~19%), restenosis (~13%), and persistently elevated BP (~35%) were more common.
Angioplasty plus stenting would, in theory, have more advantages, especially when carried out
in locations at high risk for restenosis. The largest experience published to date comes from
Durros et al. In this study, after a 4 years follow-up, patients treated with a specific, early renal
artery stent, registered a significant decrease in blood pressure values, a small decrease in
number of antihypertensive drugs needed for HTN control, with an overall mortality rate of
26%. Restenosis rate varied from 10% to 30%, depending on the type of stenosis and length of
follow-up (20).
According to the current ESC Guidelines on the management of PAD, in the case of indication
for angioplasty, stenting is recommended in ostial atherosclerotic RAS (Class I, LOE B). In all
other clinical situations discussed within the Guidelines the level of recommendation is Class
IIb: angioplasty, preferably with stenting, may be considered in the case of >60% symptomatic
RAS secondary to atherosclerosis; endovascular treatment of RAS may be considered in
patients with impaired renal function. Treatment of RAS, by balloon angioplasty with or without
stenting, may be considered for patients with RAS and unexplained recurrent congestive heart
failure or sudden pulmonary edema and preserved systolic left ventricular function.

CLINICAL TRIALS
Three studies have compared initial angioplasty without stenting with medical therapy: EMMA
(Essai Multicentrique Medicaments vs Angioplastie) (21), the Scottish and Newcastle Renal
Artery Stenosis trial (22) and DRASTIC (the Dutch Renal Artery Stenosis Intervention
Cooperative) (23). After combining the results of these trials, patients subjected to angioplasty
had a small decrease in BP values (6.3/3.3 mmHg, p 0.02/0.03) when compared to those
receiving pharmacologic treatment, with a less than significant change in serum creatinine (p
0.06) (24).
Since 2009, results have been published from new trials comparing best medical therapy versus
angioplasty with stenting. However, no significant benefits were seen in revascularisation
therapy of RAS.
The ASTRAL (Angioplasty and Stenting for Renal Artery Lesions) trial, published in 2009, was
based on the hypotheses that interventional therapy delays the decline in renal function. Thus,
806 patients were randomised to either receive best medical treatment plus revascularisation,
or best medical therapy alone (25). Study results were negative. However, it should be noted
that the study did not include patients with flash pulmonary edema, critical RAS and very
severe or uncontrolled hypertension; intervention in these subsets of patients is not supported
by a high level of evidence but is often performed in clinical practice. Moreover, the primary
goal of this trial was to follow-up on the decline rate of renal function and not HTN control after
the intervention.
The STAR (Stent Placement in Patients With Atherosclerotic Renal Artery Stenosis and Impaired
Renal Function) trial conducted on a significantly smaller number of patients (140) offered
similar results (26).
The most recently published trial on this topic, the CORAL (Cardiovascular Outcomes in Renal
Atherosclerotic Lesions) trial included 947 patients with RAS and significant HTN (on two or
more antihypertensive drugs) who were then randomised to receive either medical therapy

alone or medical therapy plus renal stenting (27). Even though CORAL included only patients
with a significant renal artery stenosis of at least 60% of the diameter (as opposed to the 40%
cut-off value used in the ASTRAL and STAR trials), no clinical benefit was proven for stenting.
This trial concludes that implanting stents for moderately severe obstructive renovascular
disease is no better than medical therapy alone in preventing the primary end point of death
from cardiovascular or renal causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitaliation for heart
failure, progression of renal failure, or the need for renal-replacement therapy.
In canine models, only stenoses 75% of diameter determine HTN and only those 80% are
associated with a decline in renal function (28). The degree of stenosis that causes a switch
from aerobic to anaerobic metabolism in renal tubular cells and results in the commonly
discussed, but poorly defined, condition of ischemic nephropathy has not been determined.
In clinical practice, results after intervention vary significantly from a slight improvement to a
lack of response or even worsening of the condition. When interpreting these results, one must
consider the causality between atherosclerotic renal artery disease and hypertension or renal
failure (or even both).
In summary, in the care of atherosclerotic RAS patients with refractory HTN, recurrent or
refractory congestive heart failure, or worsening renal function, renal revascularisation may be
considered, keeping in mind all uncertainties above mentioned. Until new treatments are found
to be safe and effective, patients in everyday practice who have moderately severe
atherosclerotic renovascular disease and either hypertension or stage 3 chronic kidney disease,
should receive medical therapy to control blood pressure and prevent the progression of
atherosclerosis.

CONCLUSIONS
Renal artery stenosis must be considered in any patient with a history of severe or resistant
HTN, especially in those associating a decline in renal function or significant atherosclerosis in
other vascular territories. Initial work-up must include renal function evaluation and lipid
profile, followed by a DUS evaluation. If high-quality duplex imaging is not available, then CTA
or MRA may be appropriate. From a therapeutic standpoint, patients with FMD benefit from
angioplasty. Intensive medical therapy, including tight control of BP with a regimen that
includes a blocker of the reninangiotensinaldosterone system, is appropriate. Serum
creatinine and serum potassium must be closely monitored especially at drug therapy initiation
and at drug dosage increments. Furthermore, patients with RAS must receive maximal medical
treatment, including an antiplatelet agent and a statin, with care given to the treatment of
diabetes, if present. The role of revascularisation in the treatment of atherosclerotic renal-
artery stenosis is still controversial. Recently published trials did not prove superiority of
interventional therapy, but most authors recommend angioplasty with or without stenting
when HTN control cannot be achieved, if renal function is declining and in patients with flash
pulmonary oedema.

REFERENCES



1 - Atherosclerotic renovascular disease in United States patient aged 67 years and older: risk factors,
revascularization, and prognosis.
Kalra PA, Guo H, Kausz AT, et al. Kidney Int. 2005;68:293-30.
2 - Hypertension. Henry R. Black, William J. Elliot. A Companion to Braunwalds Heart Disease. Second Edition.
Elsevier Saunders, 2013; Ch 8, pg. 69-79.
3 - Renovascular hypertension: Balancing the controversies in diagnosis and treatment. Garovic VD, Kane GC,
Schwartz GL. Cleveland Clinic J of Med 2005;72, no 12: 1135 1146.
4 - Joseph G. Murphy, Margaret a. Lloyd (editors in chief). Associate Editors Peter A. Brady, Lyle J. Olson,
Raymond C. Shields. Mayo Clinic Cardiology. Concise Textbook, Fourth Edition. Mayo Clinic Scientific Press, Mayo
Foundation for Medical Education and Research 2013; Ch 47, pg. 470-474.
5 - Arteriographic detection of renovascular disease in potential renal donors: incidence and effect on donor
surgery. Neymark E, LaBerge JM, Hirose R, Melzer JS, Kerlan RK Jr, Wilson MW,Gordon RL. Radiology
2000;214:755760.
6 - Renovascular Hypertension and Ischemic Nephropathy.Garovic V, Textor S. Circulation. 2005;112:1362-1374.
7 - Hypertension of renal origin: evidence for two different mechanisms.
Brunner HR, Kirshman JD, Sealey JE, Laragh JH. Science 1971;174:13441346.
8 - Clinical utility of the resistive index in atherosclerotic renovascular disease. Crutchley TA, Pearce JD, Craven TE,
et al. J Vasc Surg 2009;49:148-155.
9 - Tendera M, Aboyans V, Bartelink ML, et al. ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral artery
diseases. Eur Heart J (2011) 32, 28512906 doi:10. 1093/ eurheartj/ehr211.
10 - Techniques in interventional radiology: renal CT angiography. Josephs CS. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol.
2006;9:167-171.
11 - Renovascular imaging in the NSF era. J Magn Reson Imaging. Roditi G, Maki JH, Olieira G, Michaely
HJ. 2009;30:323-334.
12 - ACC/AHA 2005 Practice Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Peripheral Arterial Disease (Lower
Extremity, Renal, Mesenteric, and Abdominal Aortic). A Collaborative Report from the American Association for
Vascular Surgery/Society for Vascular Surgery, Society for Cardio-vascular Angiography and Interventions, Society
for Vascular Medicine and Biology, Society of Interventional Radiology, and the ACC/AHA Task Force on Practice
Guidelines. Hirsch AT, Haskal ZJ, Hertzer NR, et al. Circulation. 2006;113:e463-e654.
13 - American Heart Association Atherosclerotic Peripheral Vascular Disease Symposium recommendations.
Rocha-Singh KJ, Eisenhauer AC, Textor SC, et al. Circulation 2008;118:2873-2878.
14 - European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (version 2012). The Fifth Joint
Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in
Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts)
Developed with the special contribution of the European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention &
Rehabilitation (EACPR).Perk J, De Backer G, Gohlke H, et al. Eur Heart J 2012;33:28:1635-170.
15 - Renal-Artery Stenosis. Dworkin LD, Cooper, CJ. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1972-8.
16 - Stable patients with atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis should be treated first with medical
management. Plouin PF. Am J Kidney Dis 2003;42:851857.
17 - An analysis comparing open surgical and endovascular treatment of atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis.
Abela R, Ivanova S, Lidder S, et al. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2009;38:666-675.
18 - Renal artery stenosis. Safian RD, Textor SC. N Engl J Med 2001;344:431-442.

19 - Clinical benefit of renal artery angioplasty with stenting for the control of recurrent and refractory congestive
heart failure. Gray BH, Olin JW, Childs MB, Sullivan TM, Bacharach JM. Vasc Med. 2002;7:275279).
20 - Multicenter Palmaz stent renal artery stenosis revascularization registry report: four-year followup of 1068
successful patients. Durros G, Jaff M, Mathiak L, et al. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2002;55:182-188.
21 - Blood pressure outcome of angioplasty in atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis: a randomized trial. Plouin PF,
Chatellier G, Darn B, Raynaud A. Essai Multicentrique Medicaments vs Angioplastie (EMMA) Study Group.
Hypertension. 1998 Mar;31(3): 823-9.
22 - Webster J, Marshall F, Abdalla M, et al. Randomized comparison of percutaneous angioplasty vs continued
medical therapyfor hypertensive patients with atheromatous renal artery stenosis. Scottish and Newcastle Renal
Artery Stenosis Collaborative Group. J Hum Hypertens. 1998 May;12(5):329-35.
23 - The Dutch Renal Artery Stenosis Intervention Cooperative (DRASTIC) Study. van Jaarsveld B, Krijnen P,
Bartelink A, et al. J Hypertens Suppl. 1998 Oct;16(6):S21-7.
24 - Continuing uncertainty about the value of percutaneous revascularization in atherosclerotic renovascular
disease: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Ives NJ, Wheatley K, Stowe RL, et al. Nephrol Dial Transplant
2003;18:298-304.
25 - The ASTRAL Investigators. Revascularisation versus medical therapy for renal-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med
2009;361:1953-62.
26 - Bax L, Woittiez AJ, Kouwenberg HJ, et al. Stent placement in patients with atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis
and impaired renal function: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2009;150:840-8.
27 - Cooper CJ, Murphy TP, Cutlip DE, et al. Stenting and medical therapy for atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis.
N Engl J Med 2014;370:13-22.
28 - Imanishi M, Akabane S, Takamiya M, et al. Critical degree of renal arterial stenosis that causes hypertension in
dogs. Angiology 1992;43:833-42.

NOTES TO EDITOR


Elisabeta Badila MD, PhD, FESC
University of Medicine and Pharmacy Carol Davila
Emergency Clinical Hospital of Bucharest
Bucharest, Romania

Emma Tintea, MD, PhD student.
University of Medicine and Pharmacy Carol Davila
Emergency Clinical Hospital of Bucharest
Bucharest, Romania

Authors' disclosures: None declared.
The content of this article reflects the personal opinion of the author/s and is not necessarily the official position of
the European Society of Cardiology.