Key result
Split renal function studies have been historically used and modified to identify patients with hypertension resulting from diminished blood flow to one kidney.
Why the study?
Do split renal function studies accurately identify patients with unilateral renovascular hypertension who will benefit from surgery?
Do split renal function studies accurately identify patients with unilateral renovascular hypertension who will benefit from surgery?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This historical review discusses the evolution of split renal function studies in diagnosing renovascular hypertension.
Following the observation of split renal function studies by White in 1950,1later modified as a diagnostic test for renovascular hypertension by Howard et al in 1954,2it seemed possible that split renal function studies might be relied upon to provide a basis for the identification of patients with hypertension resulting from a diminished blood flow to one kidney. In 1957, Conner and associates3reported that in cases of unilateral renovascular disease the blood pressure improved after surgery only when the preoperative test had shown a diminished urine flow and sodium concentration on the involved side. A number of methods have subsequently been used to improve the performance or interpretation of split renal function tests, namely those of Rapoport in 1960,4Stamey in 1961,5and Birchall et al in 1962.6It is apparent from the number of tests which have been introduced as well as from published reports,7-10that no
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Richard A. Schacht (1967) conducted a review in Renovascular hypertension. Split renal function studies was evaluated. Split renal function studies have been historically used and modified to identify patients with hypertension resulting from diminished blood flow to one kidney.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: