背景　傳統治療腎動脈狹窄的方法是經由股動脈執行腎動脈氣球擴張術和支架術，股動脈直接加壓止血後需臥床休息數小時，而且易有血管併發症﹔經橈動脈冠狀動脈介入性治療已經證實是安全且可行，在此回溯性報告中我們評估使用這種方法執行腎動脈狹窄介入性治療之可行性。方法　在20位病人中，共21條腎動脈狹窄，我們使用6Fr導引導管經左橈動脈施行氣球擴張術和支架術之介入性治療。結果　21條腎動脈狹窄中，18條腎動脈施行支架術，3條腎動脈作氣球擴張術﹔18條施行支架術的腎動脈中有10條腎動脈須先行氣球擴張，成功率100%。住院中沒有病患死亡，只有一位病患發生腎臟周圍血腫需要輸血﹔一位病患有嚴重冠心病于術後一個月猝死。七位病患共8條腎動脈施行血管攝影追蹤平均11.0±7.8個月，一位發生再狹窄(12.5%)。臨床追蹤平均14.3±14.5個月，4位腎功能改善(21%)，9位穩定(47.4%)，6位變壞(31.6%)﹔高血壓治療：1位恢復(5.3%)，5位改善(26.3%)，13位不變(68.4%)。結論　經橈動脈執行腎動脈介入性治療是安全且可行的，容易止血且降低血管併發症，病患也可提早下床活動，值得考慮成為替代傳統股動脈途徑施行腎動脈介入性治療。

Background: Conventional renal artery angioplasty is performed through femoral artery access. Femoral artery access requires several hours of bed rest to ensure hemostasis, and combined vascular complications are frequently encountered. It has been proven that the transradial approach for coronary artery intervention is technically safe and feasible. In this study, we used this alternative approach for percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty (PTRA) and stenting (PTRS). Methods: Twenty patients with 21 renal artery stenotic lesions were treated via the left radial artery approach. The intervention was carried out using a 6 French (Fr) system for PTRA and PTRS. Result: The immediate procedural success was 100% (three PTRAs and eighteen PTRSs). Direct stenting was performed in 8/21 stenoses; predilatation was necessary in 10/21. The only major complication was one renal artery perforation with perirenal hematoma requiring transfusion. There was no procedure-related death or cerebrovascular event. One patient with severe coronary artery disease suffered from sudden death 1 month after the intervention. Angiographic follow-up was obtained in 7 patients with 8 renal arteries treated (38.1%) after a mean 11.0±7.8 months. There was one angiographic instent restenosis (12.5%), which required a repeat balloon angioplasty. Clinical follow-up at a mean of 14.3±14.5 months revealed that renal function had improved in 4 (21.0%), had remained stable in 9 (47.4%), and had worsened in 6 (31.6%). Hypertension was found to have reversed in 1 (5.3%), to have improved in 5 (26.3%), and to have remained unchanged in 13 (68.4%). Conclusions: Transradial renal artery intervention is technically feasible and safe. An additional advantage is the ease with which hemostasis is achieved and the elimination of bleeding complications that allow immediate ambulation after the procedure. Therefore, transradial approach can be considered as an alternative to traditional transfemoral approach for renal artery intervention.