International Urology and Nephrology

, Volume 8, Issue 4, pp 331–335 | Cite as

Double renal biopsy with Menghini needle

  • J. Sámik


The complications of percutaneous renal biopsy with Menghini needle, performed in 400 cases by the author, are reviewed. Position of the kidney was located by intravenous pyelography and was checked by further radiography if 1. the pyelogram was of inadequate technique, 2. the kidneys were small, or 3. ptotic. In two-thirds of the cases the specimens were taken in duplicates, so as to provide sufficient material for light-, electron-, polarization-microscopic and immunofluorescent studies. On the evidence of the present observations the technique of double biopsy involves no higher incidence of complications than the conventional procedure, nor did it cause complications of major severity in the individual cases.


Public Health Individual Case Renal Biopsy Present Observation Conventional Procedure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Alwall, N.: Aspiration biopsy of the kidney, including a report of a case of amyloidosis diagnosed through aspiration biopsy of the kidney in 1944 and investigated at an autopsy in 1950.Acta med. Scand. 143, 430 (1952).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beregi, E., Varga, I.: Histologic, immunohistologic and electron microscopic studies of re-biopsy specimens.Morph. Ig. Orv. Szemle 14, 90 (1974).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bogsch, A., Varga, I.: Renal abnormalities demonstrable by serio-nephro-angiography after percutaneous aspiration biopsy.Magy. Rad. 23, 210 (1971).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Iversen, P., Brun, C.: Aspiration biopsy of the kidney.Amer. J. Med., 11, 324 (1951).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kark, R. M., Muehrcke, R. C.: Biopsy of kidney in prone position.Lancet I, 1047 (1954).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kark, R. M., Buenger, R. E.: Television-monitored fluoroscopy in percutaneous renal biopsy.Lancet I, 904 (1966).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kerr, D. N. S.: Renal biopsy with modified Menghini needle.Lancet II, 1370 (1960).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Petrányi, Gy., Hegedüs, A.: Aspiration biopsy of kidney.Orv. Hetil. 99, 854 (1958).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Petrányi, Gy., Endes, P., Hegedüs, A.: Predictive value of percutaneous needle biopsy of kidney.Orv. Hetil., 102, 1686 (1961).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pintér, J., Csata, S.: Advantages of the open technique for renal biopsy.Orv. Hetil. 103, 1994 (1962).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pintér, J.: Chronic Renal Disease. Medicina, budapest 1973.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sámik, J.: Acute pancreatitis and renal failure after percutaneous renal biopsy.Orv. Hetil., 115, 3059 (1974).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Thaler, H., Beringer, A., Deutsch, E.: Nierenbiopsien mit der Menghini-Nadel.Wien. Klin. Wschr., 72, 453 (1960).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Varga, I.: The advantages of percutaneous renal biopsy.Orv. Hetil., 110, 1357 (1969).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Varga, I., Bogsch, A.: The advantages of television-monitored image-intensified fluoroscopy in percutaneous renal biopsy.Magy. Rad. 23, 205 (1971).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Sámik
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of MedicineUniversity Medical SchoolPécs

Personalised recommendations