RESUMO
PURPOSE: Our study aimed to evaluate the effect of COVID-19 on pediatric urology practice in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). METHODS: Data of 10 tertiary hospitals in KSA were retrospectively analyzed. Data of outpatient department (OPD) visits and pediatric urology surgical procedures from January 1, 2019, to April 30, 2019, and from January 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020, were extracted. The primary outcome was to compare OPD visits and pediatric urology workload in the first third of 2020 versus 2019, where there was no curfew. The secondary outcome was to compare the same variables during the full curfew time, i.e., April 2020 versus April 2019. RESULTS: The number of OPD visits was lower in the first third of 2020 (7390 vs. 10,379 in 2019 P < 0.001). OPD visits in April 2020 were 78.6% lower than in April 2019, and teleclinics represented 850 (94.3%). Elective procedures in the first third of 2020 were 688, with a reduction rate of 34.3% compared to the same period of 2019 (P < 0.001). In April 2020, there were 18 elective surgeries, with a 91.4% decrease than in April 2019. Ureteric reimplantation, hypospadias, cryptorchidism, and circumcision stopped, while pyeloplasty (n = 14) and urolithiasis (n = 4) procedures had declined by 50% and 76.5%, respectively. Most of the procedures (71.8%) were day surgery. Emergency procedures were similar in the first third of 2020 (65 vs. 64 in 2019, P = 0.994) and declined in April 2020 by 6.7% versus April 2019. During the full curfew, the most common emergency intervention were cases with obstructive uropathy (42.8%), followed by torsion testis (28.6%), posterior urethral valve (14.3%), and urological trauma (14.3%). CONCLUSIONS: In KSA, the number of elective pediatric surgical procedures were reduced by >90%, while the number of emergency pediatric surgical procdures were similar during COVID-19 pandemic compared with non-COVID-19 time. Ureteric reimplantation, hypospadias repair, cryptorchidism, and circumcision procedures were postponed. Pyeloplasty and urolithiasis-related procedures were performed to prevent irreversible disease progression or organ damage. There was an increase in rate of teleclinic and day surgery to reduce the risk of COVID-19 infection.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Surgical treatment of vesicoureteral reflux is required after conservative treatment has failed. However, there is a controversy if fibrosis related to previous attempts of dextranomer/hyaluronic acid (Dx/Ha) injection increases the risk of surgical difficulty and postoperative complications. Therefore, the purpose of our study was to compare the outcome of salvage ureteral reimplantation (SUR), after failed endoscopic therapy, to that of primary ureteral reimplantation in patients with high-grade primary vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of children, <14 years old, treated for Grade IV or V VUR, between 1998 and 2014. Cases were classified into the SUR or the PUR group. Cases of secondary VUR were excluded. All patients were treated using a cross-trigonal ureteral reimplantation technique by two surgeons. The following demographic and clinical variables were included in the analysis: presentation, reflux severity, scarring on imaging, age at endoscopic injection, total amount of Dx/Ha injected, operative time, postoperative hospital stay, operative complications, incidence of febrile urinary tract infections (UTIs) after surgery, and persistent VUR. Between the groups, differences were evaluated using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were included, 19 in the SUR and 7 in the primary ureteral reimplantation (PUR) group. In the SUR group, 12 cases had a bilateral VUR and 7 had a unilateral VUR, with 4 bilateral and 3 unilateral VUR cases in the PUR group. In the SUR group, 13 patients had received one Dx/Ha injections, with the other 6 receiving two injections, of 0.5 ml of Dx/Ha (range, 0.5-2.0 ml). A bilateral reimplantation was performed in 14/19 patients in the SUR group and 4/7 in the PUR group. The median age at surgery was 4 years in the SUR group and 3 years in the PUR group (P < 0.02). The median operative time was comparable between the groups (120 and 140 min for the SUR and PUR groups, respectively, P = 0.73), with a comparable length of hospital stay (5 and 6 days, respectively, P = 0.061). Blood loss was generally <10 ml, except in three cases in the SUR group, due to difficult dissection. Over the median follow-up of 1 year, persistent Grade III SUR was identified in only one patient in the SUR group, with no occurrence of febrile UTIs postoperatively. CONCLUSION: SUR for high-grade primary VUR after failed Dx/Ha injection has the same success rate as PUR, with no significant complication rate, although the necessary dissection may be more difficult.
