top of page
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute

Journal of Health and Medical Sciences

ISSN 2622-7258

Screen Shot 2018-08-12 at 1.24.09 AM.png
Screen Shot 2018-08-12 at 1.24.02 AM.png
Screen Shot 2018-08-12 at 1.23.57 AM.png
Screen Shot 2018-08-12 at 1.23.52 AM.png
open access

Published: 27 September 2019

Doppler Comparison of Resistive Index of Renal Artery in Obstructive and Non Obstructive Kidneys

Tehzeeb Maryam, Ayesha Sattar, Tooba Shafiq, Adil Imran, Shama Yasin, Sadaf Tahira, Madiha Arooj, Sadia Azam, Mishal Ismail, Amna Farooq, Zeshan Haider, Raham Bacha, Hafiz Ehtisham-Ul-Haq, Muhammad Khan

The University of Lahore, Lahore, Pakistan

journal of social and political sciences
pdf download

Download Full-Text Pdf



Pages: 396-402

Keywords: Intra-Obstructive Kidney, Non-Obstructive Kidney, Resistive Index


Background: Renal obstruction evaluation by X-Rays and CT scan is harmful and causes ionization in the body. That's why we find out the Diagnostic Accuracy of Doppler Ultrasound by doing it in our population for the Accurate and Early Detection of RI, especially in Renal obstruction. Objectives: To compare the resistive index of the renal artery in obstructive and non- obstructive kidneys by Doppler ultrasound. Methods: Comparative study design was used for this study. 162 patients are taken as sample size from different hospitals (DHQ Joharabad and Gillani Center, Lahore). The duration of the study was 3 Months after the approval of synopsis. Sampling technique used was Convenient Sampling technique. Date collected with the help of questioner and analyzed by using SPSS 22 mean, standard deviation, frequency distribution, and t-test. Results: The mean score value of the resistive index in non-obstructive kidney group was 0.63 ± 0.02. The minimum score value was 0.60, and the maximum score value was 0.66. In obstructive kidney group, the mean value of the resistive index was 0.77 ± 0.03. The minimum score value was 0.73, and the maximum score value was 0.81. There is a significant difference between these two groups as the p value of the t test statistics is less than the level of significance. Conclusion: It was concluded that calculi obstructive kidney caused prominent changes in the value of the resistivity index as compared to the resistivity index of normal kidney. The effect of obstruction has caused elevation of resistivity index pattern.


  1. Azam, A, Arfan, H & Beg, MA 2013. ‘Role of renal arterial resistive index (RI) in obstructive uropathy’, J Pak Med Assoc, vol. 63, no. 12, pp. 1511-5.
  2. Aziz, ZA, Satchithananda, K, Khan, M & Sidhu, PS 2005. ‘High-frequency color Doppler ultrasonography of the spermatic cord arteries: resistive index variation in a cohort of 51 healthy men’, J Ultrasound Med, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 905-9.
  3. Basturk, T, Akcay, M, Albayrak, R, Unsal, A, Ulas, T & Koc, Y 2012a. ‘Correlation between the resistive index values of renal and orbital arteries’, Kidney Blood Press Res, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 332-9.
  4. Basturk T, Albayrak R, Ulas T, Akcay M, Unsal A, Toksoy M, et al. 2012b. ‘Evaluation of resistive index by color Doppler imaging of orbital arteries in type II diabetes mellitus patients with microalbuminuria’, Ren Fail, vol. 34, no. 6 pp. 708-12.
  5. Bellos I, Perrea DN, Kontzoglou K. 2019. ‘Renal resistive index as a predictive factor of delayed graft function: a meta-analysis’, Transplant Rev (Orlando), vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 145-53.
  6. Beloncle F, Rousseau N, Hamel JF, Donzeau A, Foucher AL, Custaud MA, et al. 2019. ‘Determinants of Doppler-based renal resistive index in patients with septic shock: impact of hemodynamic parameters, acute kidney injury and predisposing factors’, Ann Intensive Care, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 51.
  7. Bisi MC, do Prado AD, Piovesan DM, Bredemeier M, da Silveira IG, de Mendonca JA, et al. 2017. ‘Ultrasound resistive index, power Doppler, and clinical parameters in established rheumatoid arthritis’, Clin Rheumatol, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 947-51.
  8. Bloch MJ, Basile J. 2003. ‘The diagnosis and management of renovascular disease: a primary care perspective: part I. making the diagnosis’, J Clin Hypertens, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 210-8.
  9. Conti F, Ceccarelli F, Gigante A, Perricone C, Barbano B, Massaro L, et al. 2015. ‘Ultrasonographic evaluation of resistive index and renal artery stenosis in patients with anti-phospholipid syndrome: two distinct mechanisms?’, Ultrasound Med Biol, vol. 41, no. 7, pp. 1814-20.
  10. Dewitte A, Coquin J, Meyssignac B, Joannes-Boyau O, Fleureau C, Roze H, et al. 2012. ‘Doppler resistive index to reflect regulation of renal vascular tone during sepsis and acute kidney injury’, Crit Care, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 165.
  11. Ellenbogen H, Scheible FW, Talner L, Leopold GR. 1978. ’Sensitivity of gray scale ultrasound in detecting urinary tract obstruction’, Am J Roentgenol, vol. 130, no. 4, pp. 731-3.
  12. Guinot PG, Bernard E, Abou Arab O, Badoux L, Diouf M, Zogheib E, et al. 2013. ‘Doppler-based renal resistive index can assess progression of acute kidney injury in patients undergoing cardiac surgery’, J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 890-6.
  13. Gurel S, Akata D, Gurel K, Ozmen MN, Akhan O. 2006. ‘Correlation between the renal resistive index (RI) and nonenhanced computed tomography in acute renal colic: how reliable is the RI in distinguishing obstruction?’, J Ultrasound Med, vol. 25. No. 9, pp. 1113-20.
  14. Kavakli H, Koktener A, Yilmaz A. 2011. ’Diagnostic value of renal resistive index for the assessment of renal colic’, Singapore Med J, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 271-3.
  15. Kim WS, Han TI, Kim SH, Park M, Kim IO, Yeon KM. 2004. ‘Renal Doppler ultrasound examination of ureteral obstruction in rabbits: effects of different sites and degrees of obstruction on renal resistive index’, Invest Radiol, vol. 39, no. 9, pp. 531-6.
  16. Kirkpantur A, Yilmaz R, Baydar DE, Aki T, Cil B, Arici M, et al. 2008. ‘Utility of the Doppler ultrasound parameter, resistive index, in renal transplant histopathology’, Transplant Proc, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 104-6.
  17. Kojima M, Ochiai A, Naya Y, Okihara K, Ukimura O, Miki T. 2000. ‘Doppler resistive index in benign prostatic hyperplasia: correlation with ultrasonic appearance of the prostate and infravesical obstruction’, Eur Urol, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 436-42.
  18. Krumme B, Hollenbeck M. 2007. ‘Doppler sonography in renal artery stenosis--does the Resistive Index predict the success of intervention?’ Nephrol Dial Transplant, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 692-6.
  19. Lerolle N, Guerot E, Faisy C, Bornstain C, Diehl JL, Fagon JY. 2006. ‘Renal failure in septic shock: predictive value of Doppler-based renal arterial resistive index’, Intensive Care Med, vol. 32, no. 10, pp. 1553-9.
  20. Nekouei S, Ahmadnia H, Abedi M, Alamolhodaee MH, Abedi MS. 2012. ‘Resistive index of the remaining kidney in allograft kidney donors’, Exp Clin Transplant, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 454-7.
  21. Platt J, Rubin JM, Ellis JH. 1989. ‘Distinction between obstructive and non-obstructive pyelocaliectasis with duplex Doppler sonography’, Am J Roentgenol, vol. 153, no. 5, pp. 997-1000.
  22. Ravindernath M, Reddy GM. 2017. ’Mean resistive index as a prognostic tool for hydronephrosis in patients with acute renal colic: a study in a tertiary care’, Int J Adv Med, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 329-33.
  23. Rodgers P, Bates J, Irving H. 1992. ‘Intrarenal Doppler ultrasound studies in normal and acutely obstructed kidneys’, Br J Radiol, vol. 65, no. 771, pp. 207-12.
  24. Shokeir AA, Provoost AP, El-Azab M, Dawaba M, Nijman RJ. 1996a. ‘Renal doppler ultrasound in children with normal upper urinary tracts: effect of fasting, hydration with normal saline, and furosemide administration’, Urology, vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 740-4.
  25. Shokeir AA, Provoost AP, El-Azab M, Dawaba M, Nijman RJ. 1996b. ‘Renal Doppler ultrasound in children with obstructive uropathy: effect of intravenous normal saline fluid load and furosemide’, J Urol, vol. 156, no. 4, pp. 1455-8.
  26. Strandness D (ed.) 2000, Doppler and ultrasound methods for diagnosis. Seminars in Nephrology.
  27. Tublin ME, Bude RO, Platt JF. 2003. ‘The resistive index in renal Doppler sonography: where do we stand?’, Am J Roentgenol, vol. 180, no. 4, pp.885-92.
bottom of page