Nephroangiotomography (NATG), intravenous subtraction angiography (ISA) and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) were compared with regard to their specificity and diagnostic value, their expenditure of time, equipment and staff as well as to their risk for the patients. The interpretation of NATG is inferior to ISA. The hitting quota of ISA and DSA is equal. The expenditure of time and staff for ISA is important, whereas the equipment for DSA is considerable; however, it has a wider use. In case of a low patient number, ISA delivers sufficient results in the diagnosis of renal hypertension with the advantage that it can also be performed in smaller radiological institutes.