Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical and radiographic outcomes following salvage intervention for ureteropelvic junction obstruction
Crivelli, Joseph J; Johnson, Brett A; Steinberg, Ryan L; Gahan, Jeffrey C; Antonelli, Jodi A; Morey, Allen F; Pearle, Margaret S; Cadeddu, Jeffrey A.
  • Crivelli, Joseph J; University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. Department of Urology. Dallas. US
  • Johnson, Brett A; University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. Department of Urology. Dallas. US
  • Steinberg, Ryan L; University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. Department of Urology. Dallas. US
  • Gahan, Jeffrey C; University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. Department of Urology. Dallas. US
  • Antonelli, Jodi A; University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. Department of Urology. Dallas. US
  • Morey, Allen F; University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. Department of Urology. Dallas. US
  • Pearle, Margaret S; University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. Department of Urology. Dallas. US
  • Cadeddu, Jeffrey A; University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. Department of Urology. Dallas. US
Int. braz. j. urol ; 47(6): 1209-1218, Nov.-Dec. 2021. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-1340040
ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT

Purpose:

We aimed to assess failure rates of salvage interventions and changes in split kidney function (SKF) following failed primary repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). Materials and

Methods:

A retrospective review of adult patients at an academic medical center who underwent salvage intervention following primary treatment for UPJO was performed. Symptomatic failure was defined as significant flank pain. Radiographic failure was defined as no improvement in drainage or a decrease in SKF by ≥7%. Overall failure, the primary outcome, was defined as symptomatic failure, radiographic failure, or both.

Results:

Between 2008-2017, 34 patients (median age 38 years, 50% men) met study criteria. UPJO management was primary pyeloplasty/secondary endopyelotomy for 21/34 (62%), primary pyeloplasty/secondary pyeloplasty for 6/34 (18%), and primary endopyelotomy/secondary pyeloplasty for 7/34 (21%). Median follow-up was 3.3 years following secondary intervention. Patients undergoing primary pyeloplasty/secondary endopyelotomy had significantly higher overall failure than those undergoing primary pyeloplasty/secondary pyeloplasty (16/21 [76%] vs. 1/6 [17%], p=0.015). Among patients undergoing secondary endopyelotomy, presence of a stricture on retrograde pyelogram, stricture length, and SKF were not associated with symptomatic, radiographic, or overall failure. Serial renography was performed for 28/34 (82%) patients and 2/28 (7%) had a significant decline in SKF.

Conclusions:

Following failed primary pyeloplasty, secondary endopyelotomy had a greater overall failure rate than secondary pyeloplasty. No radiographic features assessed were associated with secondary endopyelotomy failure. Secondary intervention overall failure rates were higher than reported in the literature. Unique to this study, serial renography demonstrated that significant functional loss was overall infrequent.
Subject(s)


Full text: Available Index: LILACS (Americas) Main subject: Ureteral Obstruction / Laparoscopy Type of study: Observational study / Risk factors Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Language: English Journal: Int. braz. j. urol Journal subject: Urology Year: 2021 Type: Article Affiliation country: United States Institution/Affiliation country: University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center/US

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Index: LILACS (Americas) Main subject: Ureteral Obstruction / Laparoscopy Type of study: Observational study / Risk factors Limits: Adult / Female / Humans / Male Language: English Journal: Int. braz. j. urol Journal subject: Urology Year: 2021 Type: Article Affiliation country: United States Institution/Affiliation country: University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center/US