Radiation-free monitoring in the long-term follow-up of pyeloplasty: Are ultrasound new parameters good enough to evaluate a successful procedure?

被引:20
|
作者
Fernandez-Ilbieta, Maria [1 ]
Nortes-Cano, Leonardo [1 ]
Jose Guirao-Pinera, Maria [1 ]
Zambudio-Carmona, Gerardo [1 ]
Ignacio Ruiz-Jimenez, Jose [1 ]
机构
[1] Hosp CU Virgen Arrixaca, Dept Pediat Surg, El Palmar S-N, Murcia 30150, Spain
关键词
Pyeloplasty; Anteroposterior diameter; Pelvis/cortex ratio; Ultrasound monitoring; Residual hydronephrosis; URETEROPELVIC JUNCTION OBSTRUCTION; RENAL-FUNCTION; DIURESIS RENOGRAPHY; HYDRONEPHROSIS; CHILDREN; INFANTS; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1016/j.jpurol.2016.04.026
中图分类号
R72 [儿科学];
学科分类号
100202 ;
摘要
Introduction Long-term evolution of residual hydronephrosis after successful pyeloplasty is not common. In this report, we have studied new ultrasound parameters, and have investigated the frequency of residual hydronephrosis. We highlight alternative radiation-free monitoring of pediatric pyeloplasties with ultrasound alone. Patients and methods Children who had undergone successful open Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasties in the period 2001-2010 were followed up. Exclusion criteria included nonclearly obstructed renography scans (tracer clearance half-time < 20 min), crossing vessels, failed pyeloplasty, bilateral disease, other renal concomitant anomaly, absence of ultrasound measurements, and loss to follow up (< 1 year). Postoperative (postoperative) ultrasound parameters were anteroposterior (AP) diameter, pelvis-cortex (P/C) ratio, a proportion that takes in account these two values, enhancing sensitivity to evaluate minimal evolutive changes), and percentage of improvement (PI) in AP diameter (which reflects in relative means the evolution of each AP diameter, being 0% no change, and 100% absence of hydronephrosis) (Figure). Echo-graphic checks were made at 3 and 6 months post-operatively and then yearly afterwards. SPSS software (v. 17.0 IBM, College Station, TX, USA) was used. Results Out of 80 pyeloplasties performed in the above-mentioned period, 44 patients (i.e., 44 renal units) fulfilled the inclusion criteria for the main study. The median age at time of operation was 15 months (range 2 months-10.3 years). The median follow-up was 4.5 years (range 1-12 years). The mean pre-operative anteroposterior diameter was 26 mm (range 16-54 mm). At the third postoperative check, the mean the PI was 29%, and rose to 53% at 6 months (p = 0.027). Posterior controls showed a stable yearly PI during follow-up, without statistically significant variations (40-59% in subsequent years, p > 0.5). The P/C ratio had already downgraded significantly at the third postoperative check (4.6 preoperative vs. 1.8 postoperative; p = 0.03). A subgroup analysis of failed pyeloplasty (4 renal units) showed all PI < 15% at the third postoperative month (sensitivity 100%, specificity 86%). Complete resolution of hydronephrosis occurred in nine patients (20%). Discussion The P/C ratio and PI are new feasible ultrasound parameters in pyeloplasty follow-up. Early improvement in the P/C ratio can be expected and might avoid repeated ionizing scans. A PI> 15% in subsequent postoperative checks might be enough for safe monitoring with ultrasound alone. Thus, renograms may be solicited only in these cases where ultrasound parameters do not improve in the first 6 postoperative months. Afterwards, ultrasound parameters often remain stable in the long term. Absence of hydronephrosis could only be documented in the long term in one out of every five patients.
引用
收藏
页码:230.e1 / 230.e7
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Minimally invasive open pyeloplasty in children: Long-term follow-up
    Alizadeh, Farshid
    Haghdani, Saeid
    Seydmohammadi, Behnaz
    TURKISH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2020, 46 (05): : 393 - 397
  • [2] Long-term kidney function after pyeloplasty When and for how long is follow-up necessary?
    Schaefer, Frank-Mattias
    Stehr, Maximilian
    MONATSSCHRIFT KINDERHEILKUNDE, 2023, 171 (01) : 51 - 57
  • [3] What to Expect on the Long-term Follow-up of Pediatric Pyeloplasty: Critical Time Intervals and Risk Factors
    Oktar, Tayfun
    Selvi, Ismail
    Donmez, M. Irfan
    Alan, Yaren
    Degirmenci, Enes
    Ziylan, Orhan
    JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY, 2024, 59 (06) : 1170 - 1176
  • [4] Long-Term Follow-Up for Salvage Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty After Failed Open Pyeloplasty
    Shapiro, Edan Y.
    Cho, Jane S.
    Srinivasan, Arun
    Seideman, Casey A.
    Huckabay, Chad P.
    Andonian, Sero
    Lee, Benjamin R.
    Richstone, Lee
    Kavoussi, Louis R.
    UROLOGY, 2009, 73 (01) : 115 - 118
  • [5] Long-Term Follow-Up with Ross Procedure at a Single Institution in China
    Xu, Zhiwei
    Li, Wenbin
    Xu, Xiufang
    Zhou, Zifan
    Song, Shiqiu
    Ma, Jinghui
    Zhang, Jianqun
    THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGEON, 2014, 62 (03) : 216 - 221
  • [6] Long-term results of the Ross procedure in a population-based follow-up
    Kallio, Merja
    Pihkala, Jaana
    Sairanen, Heikki
    Mattila, Ilkka
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIO-THORACIC SURGERY, 2015, 47 (05) : E164 - E170
  • [7] A long-term follow-up in conservative management of unilateral ureteropelvic junction obstruction with poor drainage and good renal function
    Arena, S.
    Chimenz, R.
    Antonelli, E.
    Peri, F. M.
    Romeo, P.
    Impellizzeri, P.
    Romeo, C.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS, 2018, 177 (12) : 1761 - 1765
  • [8] Long-Term Results of Anderson-Hynes Pyeloplasty in Children: How Long Follow-Up Is Necessary?
    Reis, Leonardo Oliveira
    Ikari, Osamu
    Zani, Emerson Luis
    Costa Moretti, Tomas Bernardo
    Gugliotta, Antonio
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY, 2015, 25 (06) : 509 - 512
  • [9] Nature and Fate of Supranormal Differential Renal Function: Lessons From Long-term Follow-up After Pyeloplasty
    Cho, Sung Yong
    Kim, In Sung
    Lee, Seung-Bae
    Choi, Hwang
    Park, Kwanjin
    UROLOGY, 2013, 81 (01) : 163 - 167
  • [10] Long-term Follow-up of Patients After Antegrade Continence Enema Procedure
    Siddiqui, Anees A.
    Fishman, Steven J.
    Bauer, Stuart B.
    Nurko, Samuel
    JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC GASTROENTEROLOGY AND NUTRITION, 2011, 52 (05) : 574 - 580