Selby NM, Francis ST. Assessment of Acute Kidney Injury using MRI.
J Magn Reson Imaging 2024. [PMID:
38334370 DOI:
10.1002/jmri.29281]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2023] [Revised: 01/19/2024] [Accepted: 01/23/2024] [Indexed: 02/10/2024] Open
Abstract
There has been growing interest in using quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to describe and understand the pathophysiology of acute kidney injury (AKI). The ability to assess kidney blood flow, perfusion, oxygenation, and changes in tissue microstructure at repeated timepoints is hugely appealing, as this offers new possibilities to describe nature and severity of AKI, track the time-course to recovery or progression to chronic kidney disease (CKD), and may ultimately provide a method to noninvasively assess response to new therapies. This could have significant clinical implications considering that AKI is common (affecting more than 13 million people globally every year), harmful (associated with short and long-term morbidity and mortality), and currently lacks specific treatments. However, this is also a challenging area to study. After the kidney has been affected by an initial insult that leads to AKI, complex coexisting processes ensue, which may recover or can progress to CKD. There are various preclinical models of AKI (from which most of our current understanding derives), and these differ from each other but more importantly from clinical AKI. These aspects are fundamental to interpreting the results of the different AKI studies in which renal MRI has been used, which encompass different settings of AKI and a variety of MRI measures acquired at different timepoints. This review aims to provide a comprehensive description and interpretation of current studies (both preclinical and clinical) in which MRI has been used to assess AKI, and discuss future directions in the field. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 3.
Collapse