Abstract:Because of the lack of specific clinical signs and symptoms, acute renal infarction is apt to be missed in diagnosis and hence has a “low” incidence. In this report, a case of acute renal infarction due to idiopathic renal arterial thrombosis is presented. CASE REPORT A 40-year-old man presented with sudden onset, left sided flank pain for 14 hours, without radiation, continuous with aggravation paroxysmally, no relationship with respiratory movements and position changes. There was no history of stones passing from the urinary tract. His medical history revealed that the rupture of his right side ribs was caused by trauma. Gallstones without abdominal pain had been diagnosed one year before this admission, but he took no medication. He had smoked for ten years about 10 cigarettes/day and drunk alcohol for many years. He had no operation history. On admission, the body temperature was 36.5°C, pulse rate 80 beats/min, respiratory rate 20 beats/min and blood pressure 130/80 mmHg. There was mild tenderness on the midsection without rebound tenderness or percussion pain on the lumbar. Laboratory findings were unremarkable except for a white blood cell count (WBC) of 14 000/ml, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level of 521 U/L, aspartate aminotransferase (AST) level of 60 U/L. Dipstick urinalysis showed negative for protein and blood and normal urine sediment. The plain abdominal radiography and ultrasonography did not reveal urinary tract stone. The patient's body temperature elevated to 39°C gradually and WBC increased too. Considering the possibility of infectious diseases, antiinflammatory therapies were given, but the symptoms did not alter. Enhanced CT showed multiple ladder shaped areas of the left renal parenchyma that remained low density after the injection of contrast medium and the fill defect on distal branch of left renal artery (Figure 1A). Subcutaneous low molecular weight heparin was started and selective renal artery angiography was performed soon after abdominal CT to identify renal artery lesions and rule out further arterial occlusion lesions (Figure 2). Intraarterial thrombolytic therapy with continuous injection of urokinase 1000 U/min was given, the total dosage was 400 000 units and the symptoms were alleviated remarkably. The next day, intraarterial continuous injection of urokinase was given again with a total dosage of 200 000 units. The low density areas diminished in the follow-up angiography and the intraarterial catheter was removed. Anticoagulation therapy with low molecular weight heparin followed by warfarin to keep INR 2.0-3.0 and antiplatelet treatment with low dose aspirin was given. No thrombus was detected by Doppler ultrasound scan. The results of coagulation function were normal. The levels of anticardiolipins (ACL), Ig+C3, anti-streptolysin“o” (ASO), rheumatoid factor (RF), C-reactive protein (CRP) were negative. Enhanced CT revealed that the thrombus of left renal artery reduced at 2 weeks after the thrombolytic therapy (Figure 1B). Anticoagulation therapy with warfarin was given after discharge; and there were no recurrence during the six-month follow-up.Figure 1A.: CT image of the left renal infarction. Multiple ladder-shaped areas of the left renal parenchyma that remained hypodense after the injection of contrast medium and showed no enhancement and the fill defect on distal branch of left renal artery (arrow).Figure 1B. Follow-up CT, post-thrombolytic therapy. The thrombus of left renal artery were lessened (arrow).Figure 2. Angiography of the renal artery shows the occlusion of the left artery distal branch (arrows).DISCUSSION Acute renal infarction is often an overlooked or delayed diagnosis.1 Because its presentation is non-specific, it is frequently mistaken for the more commonly encountered ureterolithiasis, pyelonephritis, appendicitis, diverticulitis, biliary obstruction and torsion of pelvic masses. The incidence of renal infarction in an autopsy study was 1.4%, whereas clinical diagnosis was made in only 0.014% of the studied patients.2 Spontaneous kidney infarction was documented in 55 of 18 287 patients and was associated with renal artery disease in 41 cases.3 Atrial fibrillation,4 previous embolic events and valvular or ischaemic heart disease are the major causes of acute renal infarction. Additionally, other causes of acute renal infarction include trauma,5 hereditary or acquired clotting disorders, both intravenous and nasal cocaine abuse, vessel anomalies (such as spontaneous renal artery dissection,6 fibromuscular dysplasia or hereditary diseases such as Marfan syndrome or Ehlers-Danlos syndrome), medical interventions such as surgery for valve replacements, kidney transplantation, endovascular catheterization and application of intraluminal stents and malignant disease. Bolderman et al7 studied twenty-seven patients with nontraumatic CT documented acute renal infarction and grouped them according to the presence or absence of cardiac disease, either obvious at presentation or detected during clinical examination. They found that sixteen patients (59%) had no discernible structural or arrhythmic cardiac disease and were classified as idiopathic group; patients in idiopathic group were younger and besides smoking, had fewer common cardiovascular risk factors. Renal artery thrombosis often occurs in left renal artery. Its causes include trauma, atherosclerosis accompanied thrombosis, antiphospholipid antibody syndrome, connective tissue disease, thromboembolism occlusive vasculitis, severe inflammatory response syndrome, and idiopathic renal artery thrombosis. The common clinical presentations of acute renal infarction include lumbar pain on the side of the renal infarction, hypertension, and renal dysfunction. Patients with acute renal infarction commonly present with abrupt persistent flank pain, abdominal pain or low back pain, accompanied by fever, headache, nausea and vomiting. However, these symptoms are nonspecific. Physical examination reveals costovertebral angle tenderness, which is a characteristic sign of acute renal infarction. However, patients with thrombosis that affects smaller vessels may be asymptomatic. Kidney infarction induces acute hypertension, which in many instances is of a temporary nature: some patients present hypertension alone without any symptoms referable to renal infarction.8 The prevalence of spontaneous kidney infarction in patients referred for hypertension is 3‰ and the incidence is 0.18‰ per year.3 A rapid deterioration in renal function with anuria or oliguria usually develops in patients with bilateral renal artery thrombosis or infarction in a solitary kidney. Patients with unilateral artery thrombosis accompanied by contralateral artery spasm may present renal insufficiency too. Serum creatine level may increase in patients with renal distal branch thrombosis. All the laboratory tests are either nonspecific (LDH, haematuria, CRP, WBC) or lacking in sensitivity (creatine kinase, aspartate aminotransferase)9 —acute renal infarction is often a diagnosis made by exclusion. The common laboratory findings include the following. (1) Leukocytosis. (2) Haematuria (gross or microscopic) and proteinuria: urinalysis by dipstick is a simple screening test for many renal diseases. The sensitivity of this test to detect haematuria is high in contrast to a low specificity because of cross-reaction in the presence of myoglobinuria. Domanovits et al10 reported that haematuria was present at admission in 74% of their patients and in another 11%, the test became positive within the next 24 hours. Consequently, serial urinalysis within the first 24 hours of pain onset should be performed to increase its diagnostic value. However, the presence of haematuria can not differentiate renal calculus from acute renal infarction. (3) Serum AST and LDH level increased, especially an increase in LDH level is highly sensitive. Hazanov et al11 identified 44 cases of renal embolus, 41 (93%) patients had an increased serum LDH level. Although elevated serum LDH level is nonspecific for tissue necrosis, such increases would not be expected in patients with calculus disease. We suggest that serum LDH level may still be evaluated where there is persistent flank pain with or without haematuria or lack of evidence of urolithiasis. (4) Renal scintigraphy, ultrasonography and enhanced CT may be useful in diagnosing acute renal infarction. Although ultrasonography still has its role in excluding obstructive uropathy, it lacks sensitivity to detect early renal infarction. Contrast enhanced CT is the noninvasive standard for imaging acute renal infarction and is potentially available 24 hours/day. Selective renal artery angiography is an invasive diagnostic method that is not without morbidity. Thus, a high degree of clinical suspicion remains the key for early diagnosis of renal infarction. In patients who present with the triad of high risk for a thromboembolic event; persistent low back, flank and abdominal pain, elevated serum LDH and/or haematuria; contrast enhanced CT should be performed as soon as possible to rule out or to prove acute renal infarction. Therapeutic guidelines for renal artery thrombosis have not been established. The limit of warm ischaemic time for the kidney is 60 minutes to 90 minutes. Prompt recognition of acute renal infarction is important since thrombolysis, anticoagulation, or embolectomy may minimize the loss of renal function. Previous studies have shown that anticoagulation is as effective as surgical therapy: conservative therapy is recommended except in the case that bilateral emboli or infarctions of a solitary kidney have occurred.12 Thrombectomy may be appropriate in the case that bilateral emboli or infarctions of a solitary kidney have occurred. The recommended therapy has changed drastically during the past 30 years. Selective intraarterial thrombolytic therapy is considered as an effective treatment for unilateral renal infarction,13 even for bilateral renal infarction.14 If nephronecrosis develops, a nephrectomy should be performed. Therapy in acute renal infarction typically consisted of low molecular weight heparins in the acute phase followed by warfarin and low dose aspirin. However, the duration of therapy and the added value of anticoagulants over antiplatelets in the setting of idiopathic renal infarction are unknown. In addition, because these patients are also at high risk for further thromboembolisms to other organs, this might be prevented by long-term anticoagulation. Although nonspecific, the common symptom of flank pain may be the first indication of a serious illness such as acute renal infarction. Acute renal infarction may occur in previously apparently healthy individuals. In patients with flank pain without lithiasis, the diagnosis of acute renal infarction should be suspected and enhanced CT should be considered, especially when serum lactate dehydrogenase is elevated, even in the absence of atrial fibrillation.

Abstract:To the Editor: By a retrospective study including 1124 hospitalized patients diagnosed with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), Wang et al[1] showed that the independent risk factors for acute kidney injury (AKI) were age >60 years, hypertension, chronic kidney disease (CKD), Killip class ≥3, extensive anterior myocardial infarction, use of furosemide, non-use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), and these factors could provide a prediction model with good discriminative ability for the development of AKI. Given that AKI has been significantly associated with morbidity and mortality of patients with AMI,[2] their findings have potential clinical implications. Other than the limitations described by authors in the discussion; however, we noted some methodological issues in their study that needed further clarifications. First, this study showed that CKD was an independent risk factor for the occurrence of AKI. This study excluded the patients with end-stage renal diseases, but the readers were not provided with the evaluation method of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and the diagnostic criteria of CKD used in this study. Based on diagnostic criteria of the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration,[3] normal renal function is defined as eGFR ≥90 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2, CKD stage 1 as 90 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2 > eGFR ≥75 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2, CKD stage 2 as 75 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2 > eGFR ≥60 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2, CKD stage 3A as 60 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2 > eGFR ≥45 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2, CKD stage 3B as 45 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2 > eGFR ≥30 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2, and CKD stage 4 as 30 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2 > eGFR ≥15 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2. As the severity of baseline CKD has been significantly associated with the risk of AKI in patients with AMI,[4] we are concerned that the lack of these data would have confused the interpretation of their results. Second, the multivariate regression analysis was used for the identification of risk factors of AKI. It is well known that emergent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is one of the treatments used mostly common for AMI and the contrast-induced AKI is a recognized concern.[2] As the use of PCI was not included in the cardiac-associated data of patients, it was unclear how much patients received this treatment in this study. It must be emphasized that multivariate regression analysis is based on the assumption that there is a particular mathematical relation between the intervention and measured outcome. To obtain the true inferences of multivariate regression analysis for the adjusted odds ratio of the measured outcome, all of the known risk factors affecting measured outcome must be taken into the model. If an important risk factor is missed, the multivariate adjustment for the odd ratio of the measured outcome can be biased and even a spurious association between the intervention and measured outcome may be obtained. Thus, we argue that not taking emergent PCI into the model would have tampered with the inferences of multivariate regression analysis for risk factors of AKI and their adjusted odds ratios. Third, the authors determined the discriminative ability of the model by only providing the area under the receiving operator characteristic curve. This was incomplete. Discrimination refers to the ability of model distinguishing patients who experience an outcome from those who do not. The discriminative ability of a model is often quantified by the C-statistic, which represents the probability that a patient experiencing a measured outcome would have a higher predicted probability than a randomly selected patient not experiencing measured outcome. Generally speaking, C-statistics can be interpreted as excellent (0.90–1.00), good (0.80–0.89), fair (0.70–0.79), poor (0.60–0.69), or fail/no discriminative ability (0.50–0.59).[5] Finally, an important ignore by the authors was that the statistical validation of their model was not performed. Because the predictive model was developed by multivariate regression analysis using demographic, clinical, and other variables to generate outcome estimates, overfitting is a common issue, especially when the number of predictors and interaction terms are large, and the number of events is small. To protect against overfitting, an investigator often needs to split their data into a learning sample for model development and a test sample for model validation. If an investigator holds some of the same datasets aside for testing, it is called as an internal validation. If an investigator tests the model with an entirely different data source, it is called as external validation. Compared to internal validation, external validation can provide more rigorous protection against overfitting and evaluate the generalizability of the model to new contexts and populations.[6] Due to the lack of statistical validation for the model, it cannot exclude the possibility that the model leads to a less-reliable prediction for a new patient. We believe that addressing the above issues would improve the interpretation of the findings from this study. Author's Reply: AKI is a serious and fatal complication of AMI. It has high short-and long-term mortality rates and a poor prognosis but is potentially preventable. However, the current incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of AKI in the Chinese population are not well understood and would serve the first step to identify high-risk patients who should receive preventative care. Wang et al[1] presented a retrospective study including clinical data from 1145 consecutive hospitalized patients diagnosed with AMI in the Peking University People's Hospital and Beijing Jishuitan Hospital between October 2013 and September 2015. The results showed that approximately 26.0% of patients undergoing AMI developed AKI, and the development of AKI was strongly correlated with in-hospital mortality. Based on the linear regression analyses, a risk score for AKI among patients with AMI was created. The score considered age, hypertension, CKD, Killip class ≥3, extensive anterior myocardial infarction, use of furosemide, and non-use of an ACEI/ARB. The derived risk score for AKI had a good correlation when tested with the Hosmer-Lemeshow method (χ2 = 12.848, P = 0.117) and a discrimination capacity (area under receiving operator characteristics [AUROC]) of 0.907 (0.887–0.926). There are several issues about the study mentioned in the letter, we addressed as follows: first, eGFR was estimated using the modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) equation (eGFRMDRD): eGFRMDRD = 186 × serum creatinine−1.154 × Age−0.203 × 0.742 (if female) × 1.210 (if African American). In our study, we analyzed patients with stage 3 and 4 CKD (15 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2 ≤ eGFR <60 mL·min−1·1.73 m−2). Second, we had provided PCI-associated data in Table 2 of Wang et al.[1] The 734 (65.1%) patients underwent PCI. The 156 patients developed AKI during hospitalization, and the statistical analysis suggested that PCI was a risk factor for developing AKI post-AMI (P < 0.001). Third, as we mentioned in the article, the AUROC is 0.907 (0.887–0.926) in the last part of “Result” in the article of Wang et al.[1] Fourth, that is a good question and we have not ignored it. We are working on it and hopefully, you can keep up with our next article. Conflicts of interest None.

Analysis Of The Etiology And The Strategy Of Diagnosis And Treatment Of Acute Renal Infarction

Acute Renal Infarction Due to Symptomatic Isolated Spontaneous Renal Artery Dissection: A Rare and Fatal Disease.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Renal Cell Carcinoma (report of 88 Cases)

[Clinical characteristics of patients with acute renal infarction: an analysis of 52 patients in a single center].

A Rare Case of Acute Renal Infarction Due to Idiopathic Renal Arterial Thrombosis

[Study on Epidemiology and Etiology of Hospitalized Patients with Acute Renal Failure].

Clinical Application of Computed Tomographic Angiography in Patients with Renal Arterial Hemorrhage: Diagnostic Accuracy and Subsequent Therapeutic Outcome.

Risk factors for acute kidney injury in patients with acute myocardial infarction.

[Management Experience of Acute Renal Failure Induced by Unilateral Ureteral Calculi Obstruction].

The Diagnosis and Endovascular Therapy of Renal Artery Aneurysm A 32-Patient Case Report

[Epidemiology of Acute Kidney Injury in Hospitalized Patients in China].

Retrospective Analysis on Chinese Patients Diagnosed with Acute Renal Failure Hospitalized During the Last Decade (1994–2003)

Renal Insufficiency is an Independent Predictor of In-Hospital Mortality for Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Receiving Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Clinical research progress on acute kidn ey injury

The Relationsc of renal insufficiency and in-hospital prognosis in patients with acute myocardial infarction

Analysis of Clinical and Pathological Features in Biopsy-Proven Ischemic Renal Injury Patients

Multifocal Renal Infarction and Diabetic Ketoacidosis: Diagnostic Challenges and Anticoagulation Management in a Complex Case

[Prognostic Significance of Early Acute Renal Failure in Patients with Cardiogenic Shock after Acute Myocardial Infarction].

Establishing a Risk Prediction Model for Acute Kidney Injury

Survey of Acute Kidney Injury and Related Risk Factors of Mortality in Hospitalized Patients in a Third-Level Urban Hospital of Shanghai

Acute kidney injury in China: a cross-sectional survey