Ultrasound Parameters Changes after Pyeloplasty in Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction: 6-Month Follow-Up
Iranian Journal of Pediatric Surgery,
Vol. 9 No. 1 (2023),
11 May 2023
,
Page 56-67
https://doi.org/10.22037/irjps.v9i1.39957
Abstract
Background: Ureteropelvic junction obstruction(UPJO) is one of the most common anomalies in children. The gold standard method for follow-up of these patients after pyeloplasty is a nuclear scan, but due to its high cost and limited access, it has recently been replaced with ultrasound. In this study, we want to assess ultrasound parameter changes after pyeloplasty.
Methods: In this cross-sectional analytical study, 124 patients from 2006 to 2012 who had undergone open pyeloplasty were enrolled. They were evaluated with ultrasound and nuclear scans before, 3, and 6 months after surgery. We analogized the results of these two methods and described the modifications in ultrasound parameters.
Results: Of all 124 patients with a median age of 30 months, according to nuclear scan results, kidney functions have improved by 96.77%. The average AP(anteroposterior) diameter of kidneys before, 3, and 6 months after surgery were 34.28 mm, 18 mm, and 15.19 mm respectively. In patients with successful surgery; PI (percentage improvement) of AP was above 15% after 3 months and above 26% after 6 months, thickness of the cortex raised at least 10 percent, and a reduction of at least 16% and 18% was seen in pelvic/cortex ratio in 3, and 6 months respectively.
Conclusions: After pyeloplasty, a reduction in AP diameter, PI of AP, pelvic/cortex ratio, and an expansion in thickness of the cortex have been seen. Ultrasound in 3 months has high sensitivity but low specificity, and in 6 months have high sensitivity and specificity.
- UPJO
- pyeloplasty
- ultrasound
- nuclear scan
- DTPA
How to Cite
References
Liang CC, Cheng PJ, Lin CJ, et al; Outcome of prenatally diagnosed fetal hydronephrosis. The Journal of reproductive medicine. 2002 Jan 1;47(1):27-32.
Duong HP, Piepsz A, Collier F, et al; Predicting the clinical outcome of antenatally detected unilateral pelviureteric junction stenosis. Urology. 2013 Sep 1;82(3):691-6.
Carr MC, El-Ghoneimi A; Anomalies and surgery of the ureteropelvic junction in children. Campbell-Walsh urology 9th ed Philadelphia: Saunders. 2007:3359-82.
Göğüş Ç, Karamürsel T, Tokatli Z, et al; Long-term results of Anderson-Hynes pyeloplasty in 180 adults in the era of endourologic procedures. Urologia Internationalis. 2004;73(1):11-4.
Lindgren BW, Hagerty J, Meyer T, et al; Robot-assisted laparoscopic reoperative repair for failed pyeloplasty in children: a safe and highly effective treatment option. The Journal of urology. 2012 Sep;188(3):932-7.
Holcomb GW, Murphy JP, St Peter SD; Holcomb and Ashcraft's pediatric surgery E-Book. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2019 Apr 14.
BARROSO JR UB, BARROSO VA, CALADO AA, et al; Renal ultrasonographic findings before and after pyeloplasty. Official Journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. 2000 Mar;26(2):190-5.
Van Den Hoek J, De Jong A, Scheepe J, et al; Prolonged follow‐up after paediatric pyeloplasty: are repeat scans necessary? BJU international. 2007;100(5):1150-2.
Cost NG, Prieto JC, Wilcox DT; Screening ultrasound in follow-up after pediatric pyeloplasty. Urology. 2010 Jul 1;76(1):175-9.
Rickard M, Braga L, Oliveria J-P, et al; Percent improvement in renal pelvis antero-posterior diameter (PI-APD): prospective validation and further exploration of cut-off values that predict success after pediatric pyeloplasty supporting safe monitoring with ultrasound alone. Journal of Pediatric Urology. 2016;12(4):228. e1-. e6.
Kis E, Verebély T, Kövi R, et al; The role of ultrasound in the follow-up of postoperative changes after pyeloplasty. Pediatric radiology. 1998;28(4):247-9.
Hamedanchi S, Sedokani A; Color Doppler Ultrasonography in Evaluating the Outcomes of Pyeloplasty in Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction. Research and Reports in Urology. 2020 Feb 24:53-9.
Babu R, Sai V; Pelvis/cortex ratio: an early marker of success following pyeloplasty in children. Journal of Pediatric Urology. 2010;6(5):473-6.
Romao RL, Farhat WA, Pippi Salle JL, et al; Early postoperative ultrasound after open pyeloplasty in children with prenatal hydronephrosis helps identify low risk of recurrent obstruction. The Journal of urology. 2012;188(6):2347-53.
Kiblawi R, Kuebler JF, Petersen C, et al; Ultrasound Monitoring after Pelvis-Sparing Dismembered Pyeloplasty: High Sensitivity and Low Specificity for the Success of Operation. European Journal of Pediatric Surgery. 2020;30(01):021-6.
Chalieopanyarwong V, Attawettayanon W; Renal Cortical Thickness After Pyeloplasty in Pediatric Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction. Research and Reports in Urology. 2021;13:699.
=Fernández-Ibieta M, Nortes-Cano L, Guirao-Piñera MJ, et al; Radiation-free monitoring in the long-term follow-up of pyeloplasty: are ultrasound new parameters good enough to evaluate a successful procedure? Journal of Pediatric Urology. 2016;12(4):230.
Tabari AK, Atqiaee K, Mohajerzadeh L, et al; Early pyeloplasty versus conservative management of severe ureteropelvic junction obstruction in asymptomatic infants. Journal of Pediatric Surgery. 2020 Sep 1;55(9):1936-40.
- Abstract Viewed: 202 times
- PDF Downloaded: 264 times