Double trouble - management of perinephric hematoma and renal vein thrombosis post percutaneous renal biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Performing percutaneous renal biopsy procedures in lupus nephritis (LN) and nephrotic syndrome presents a unique challenge to the nephrologist because of the risk of bleeding from the procedure and the hypercoagulable state in hypoalbuminemia. The management of a patient with venous thrombosis with perinephric hematoma post renal biopsy can be difficult if occurred. CASE PRESENTATION: We are presenting a case of perinephric hematoma following percutaneous renal biopsy in a 23-year-old man with lupus nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and lower limbs deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The patient developed persistent frank haematuria, flank pain and acute urinary retention post-procedure. We have withheld his oral warfarin three days before the procedure, and no anticoagulation was given subsequently. Initial CT Angiography (CTA) renal showing stable hematoma and no visible evidence of vascular injury. Three weeks later, the patient still has persistent frank haematuria and a repeated CTA renal revealed new bilateral renal vein thrombosis. Considering the high risk of worsening symptomatic venous thrombosis, we gave subcutaneous enoxaparin sodium and restart oral warfarin despite ongoing haematuria. The frank haematuria resolved within two days of anticoagulation with no radiological evidence of worsening of the perinephric hematoma. The follow-up ultrasonography a month later showed resolution of the hematoma and renal vein thrombosis with no adverse effect. CONCLUSION: Our experience, in this case, highlighted the importance of case selection for percutaneous renal biopsy among high-risk patients. Additionally, a prolonged frank haematuria in post-renal biopsy with nephrotic syndrome warranted a reassessment, as a clinical presentation of post-procedure perinephric hematoma and renal vein thrombosis can overlap. We also demonstrated that restarting anticoagulation earlier than four weeks in a patient with renal vein thrombosis and post-renal biopsy perinephric hematoma can be safe in the selective case.

Isolated Renal and Ureter Metastasis as the First Manifestation of Rectal Adenocarcinoma.

Colorectal carcinoma (CRC) rarely metastasizes to the urinary system in isolated form. It usually spreads through direct invasion with intra-ureteric growth or local ureter mucosal metastasis without involving the muscular layer. We present a case of a 63-year-old man who came with uraemic symptoms and a ballotable right kidney. Laboratory and imaging showed acute renal failure with right renal mass suspicious of malignancy and left ureteric stricture causing hydronephrosis. He underwent right radical nephrectomy and left open ureteric stenting plus biopsy sampling. Adenocarcinoma was detected through the evaluation of the specimen. In view that adenocarcinoma rarely occurs in the urinary system, an investigation was carried out to search for the primary source. Colonoscopy was performed, which later showed adenocarcinoma of the rectum. Adenocarcinoma in the renal system should always raise the suspicion of another primary source of malignancy, especially colorectal origin. The advanced stage of this cancer should be managed with the best palliative treatment rather than aggressive surgical intervention.

A Survey on Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) Among patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) in Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUSM).

Patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) commonly presents with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), which can be of obstructive symptoms such as hesitancy, incomplete voiding, post void dribbling or of irritative symptoms such as urgency, frequency and nocturia. Various recent studies indicate that nocturia is a very important and bothersome lower urinary tract symptom especially among patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH). The aims of the study was to determine the frequency of common urinary symptoms among patients with BPH in HUSM as well as to evaluate the extent of bothersomeness of each and every symptom to these patients. This study too was aimed at evaluating the success of TURP in resolving pre operative LUTS. This was a questionnaire-based survey using a validated ICSBPH model whereby patients with BPH were selected and quizzed personally by an investigator. A subset of patients who had undergone TURP were further questioned regarding their satisfaction with the procedure. When nocturia is defined as waking up at night once or more to pass urine, the prevalence of nocturia was about 90%, but only 1 in 6 patients considered this is a very serious symptom. Even if the definition was changed to waking up twice or more, the prevalence is still quite high at over 80%. Urgency were noted in half of the patients, but only a quarter of them consider it a serious problem. 1 in 5 patients experienced significant leak and almost all consider it serious. About one third of the studied population had to be catheterized due to urinary obstruction and interestingly only about half of them considered it as a very serious event. Overall, a great majority of these patients considered suffering from these urinary symptoms for the rest of their life as very devastating. This study conclude that although the prevalence of nocturia was high among BPH patients, but it was not considered serious by majority of them. In fact, LUTS in our BPH patients did not differ much from BPH patients elsewhere. On the whole, TURP resolved most of the LUTS effectively.