Related Experiment Videos

Screening for renovascular hypertension in a population with relatively low prevalence

K H Helin1, I Tikkanen, J E von Knorring

  • 1Department of Internal Medicine, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Finland. karri.helin@huch.fi

Journal of Hypertension
|November 14, 1998
PubMed

Insights

Captopril renography (CRG) is a superior and cost-effective screening tool for renovascular hypertension compared to captopril challenge tests (CCT). Limiting CRG screening to specific patient groups enhances its cost-effectiveness for diagnosing renal artery stenosis.

Area of Science:

  • Nephrology
  • Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Diagnostic Imaging

Background:

  • Renovascular hypertension, caused by renal artery stenosis, is a significant contributor to secondary hypertension.
  • Accurate and cost-effective diagnostic methods are crucial for timely intervention and management.
  • Current screening methods like captopril challenge tests (CCT) and captopril renographies (CRG) have varying diagnostic accuracies and cost implications.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of CCT and CRG for screening renovascular hypertension.
  • To assess the efficacy of invasive treatments such as angioplasty and nephrectomy.
  • To determine optimal patient selection criteria for cost-effective screening.

Main Methods:

  • A cohort of 519 hypertensive patients were screened using CCT (n=405) and CRG (n=450).
  • Abdominal angiography was performed on 84 patients with positive screening results or suspicious clinical presentation.
  • Interventions included angioplasty and nephrectomy, with subsequent blood pressure and medication monitoring.

Main Results:

  • CRG demonstrated higher diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity 100%, specificity 68%) compared to CCT (sensitivity 67%, specificity 39%) in patients undergoing angiography.
  • Estimated specificity for the entire study population was 95% for CRG and 88% for CCT.
  • Invasive treatment in 16 patients reduced systolic/diastolic blood pressure from 157/99 to 140/87 mmHg and antihypertensive drug use from 2.6 to 1.4.
  • Screening with CRG and invasive treatment cost US$15,400 per successful outcome, versus US$10,400 for equivalent pharmacological treatment.
  • Limiting CRG screening to specific high-prevalence groups (no renal parenchymal disease, younger age, or resistant hypertension) reduced the cost to US$7,300 per patient, missing only one elderly patient responsive to ACE inhibition.

Conclusions:

  • CRG is diagnostically superior to CCT for screening renovascular hypertension.
  • CRG screening is cost-effective when selectively applied to patients with specific clinical profiles.
  • Targeted screening of patients with no obvious renal disease, younger onset hypertension, or resistance to two antihypertensive drugs optimizes resource utilization.
Abstract

Related Concept Videos