Journal of Pediatric Urology
Volume 2, Issue 3 , Pages 163-168, June 2006

Postnatal management of antenatally diagnosed ureteropelvic junction obstruction

  • A. Ismail

      Affiliations

    • Pediatric Surgery Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Pediatric Surgery Department, P.O. Box 21589, Doha, Qatar. Tel./fax: +974 4869864.
  • ,
  • A. Elkholy

      Affiliations

    • Pediatric Surgery Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
  • ,
  • O. Zaghmout

      Affiliations

    • Pediatric Surgery Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
  • ,
  • A. Alkadhi

      Affiliations

    • Pediatric Surgery Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
  • ,
  • O. Elnaggar

      Affiliations

    • Pediatric Surgery Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
  • ,
  • A. Khairat

      Affiliations

    • Pediatric Surgery Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
  • ,
  • H. Elhassanat

      Affiliations

    • Pediatric Surgery Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
  • ,
  • A. Mosleh

      Affiliations

    • Pediatric Surgery Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
  • ,
  • B. Hamad

      Affiliations

    • Pediatric Nephrology Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
  • ,
  • J. Elzomer

      Affiliations

    • Pediatric Nephrology Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar
  • ,
  • A. Elkaabi

      Affiliations

    • Pediatric Nephrology Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar

Received 30 March 2005; accepted 12 July 2005.

Abstract 

Objective

The management of antenatally diagnosed ureteropelvic junction obstruction (PUJO) is controversial. Here, we present our experience over a period of 13 years and discuss our management protocol.

Materials and methods

We reviewed the files of 234 patients with antenatally diagnosed congenital hydronephrosis due to PUJO. Management was tailored to each patient, based on a combination of diethylenetetraminepentacetic acid renogram outcome, pelvic diameter, as well as the patient’s symptoms.

Results

Pyeloplasty was carried out early in 52 kidneys. Of the total, 182 patients were managed expectantly. Out of these, 45 underwent delayed pyeloplasty. The remaining 137 patients (189 units) were managed non-operatively. In patients who underwent early pyeloplasty, the mean split differential renal function was 37% before and 40.05% after surgery. In those with delayed intervention, the mean renal function was 37.8% before and 42.2% after surgery. In patients who did not have surgery, the mean differential renal function was 45.7% initially and 48.2% at the last accepted follow up. The overall operative success rate was 97.9%.

Conclusion

We believe that pyeloplasty is the proper treatment for babies with congenital PUJO and <40% split differential function and/or pelvic diameter >35 mm at the initial visit. In other patients a period of observation is warranted, and pyeloplasty should be carried out only if their kidney function deteriorates or the renogram curve does not show improvement. With the excellent results of pyeloplasty we believe that a safer approach is to operate on more kidneys rather than risk of losing valuable kidney function.

Keywords: Congenital hydronephrosis, Antenatal diagnosis, Kidney, Pyeloplasty

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1477-5131(05)00126-9

doi:10.1016/j.jpurol.2005.07.005

Journal of Pediatric Urology
Volume 2, Issue 3 , Pages 163-168, June 2006