Six years ago, I had an open heart procedure to replace an aortic valve. The valve has now deteriorated to where it needs a replacement 18 months ago I had my left kidney removed due to cancer and now my right kidney is operating at a very low efficiency rate. I am now in stage for CKD. My concern is they need to use a contrast dye for the upcoming angiogram. The dye can be very harmful to kidneys. Has anyone been in this predicament and if so, how did it leave your kidney efficiency rate.
Upcoming TAVR
- Thread starter Quarry1
- Start date
Help Support Valve Replacement Forums:
Please be SURE the doctors are talking with each other. Specifically ask the angiogram team if they know about your kidney condition. Perhaps there is a different dye they can use, lower concentration of dye, etc. I vaguely remember a warning about the contrast dye when I got an angiogram. Fortunately, it was not a problem for me.
I'm sorry to hear about this.
I'm sorry to hear about this.
pellicle
Professional Dingbat, Guru and Merkintologist
Hey Quarry,
that's a tough one. As far as I know (and please, I'm not a specialist in this area, so be guided by the medical people with that knowledge) kidney damage caused by drugs is quite different to kidney damage caused by cancer. I'll assume that you have had some chemo treatment as a result of the cancer that led to your kidney being removed.
So some caution will be needed.
However generally speaking I've had more CT's with Contrast than I can easily count in the last 10 years and my renal function is still good. However I've generally lived a healthy life too.
I've also had (I think 2) OHS before CT with contrast was even available, so just because this diagnostic is not available does not mean you can't go ahead.
I would give serious consideration to other surgical alternatives than TAVR because you've already had one (presumably bioprosthesis) fail (presumably due to exposure to chemo) and these are not regarded as anything like permanent. Right now mechanical is the bar that others attempt to match with "long term studies" of up to 10 years.
In 10 years from now my third valve will be 20 years old.
I don't know if you've properly explored all alternatives, but now is the time (not afterwards) to fully and properly explore these options.
Best Wishes
PS I didn't do due diligence and check your age by examining things. So in your specific case at "(Age: 79)" I'd say that if surgery is contra indicated then TAVR will likely get you 7 or 10 years. But if more chemo is needed maybe less.
that's a tough one. As far as I know (and please, I'm not a specialist in this area, so be guided by the medical people with that knowledge) kidney damage caused by drugs is quite different to kidney damage caused by cancer. I'll assume that you have had some chemo treatment as a result of the cancer that led to your kidney being removed.
So some caution will be needed.
However generally speaking I've had more CT's with Contrast than I can easily count in the last 10 years and my renal function is still good. However I've generally lived a healthy life too.
I've also had (I think 2) OHS before CT with contrast was even available, so just because this diagnostic is not available does not mean you can't go ahead.
I would give serious consideration to other surgical alternatives than TAVR because you've already had one (presumably bioprosthesis) fail (presumably due to exposure to chemo) and these are not regarded as anything like permanent. Right now mechanical is the bar that others attempt to match with "long term studies" of up to 10 years.
In 10 years from now my third valve will be 20 years old.
I don't know if you've properly explored all alternatives, but now is the time (not afterwards) to fully and properly explore these options.
Best Wishes
PS I didn't do due diligence and check your age by examining things. So in your specific case at "(Age: 79)" I'd say that if surgery is contra indicated then TAVR will likely get you 7 or 10 years. But if more chemo is needed maybe less.
Last edited:
