Bladder Dysfunction and Re-Absorbable Bulking Agent Affect Success Rate in Children Underwent Endoscopic Treatment for Vesicoureteral Reflux: A Long-Term Follow-Up Study.
children
endoscopic treatment
vesicoureteric reflux
Journal
Children (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 2227-9067
Titre abrégé: Children (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101648936
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Oct 2021
01 Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
26
07
2021
revised:
26
09
2021
accepted:
27
09
2021
entrez:
23
10
2021
pubmed:
24
10
2021
medline:
24
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This paper is designed to evaluate the results (at long-term follow-up of) children affected by dilating VUR. Our attention was focused on how VUR grade, laterality, bladder dysfunction (BD), the double renal system, and the type of bulking substance may affect VUR resolution in the long-term period. The charts of 93 children with dilating VUR who underwent endoscopic treatment (ET) and with a minimum post-operative follow-up of 7 years were reviewed (mean follow-up time was 9.6 + 1.4). The majority of patients had severe and bilateral VUR. Polydimetilsiloxane or hyaluronic acid/dextranomer (PDS or Ha/Dx) were used as bulking agents. VUR persistence following endoscopic injection was independent with respect to grade, laterality, duplex renal system, and BD. However, the rate of VUR persistence was significantly higher in children with BD. Children treated with Ha/Dx had a higher rate of VUR persistence. This research demonstrated that ET of VUR is also effective at very long term follow up (and without the development of significant complications). We also showed that patients treated with absorbable bulking agents such as Ha/Dx may experience a higher recurrence rate at the long-term follow-up). We also confirm that the only preoperative condition affecting VUR recurrence was bladder dysfunction.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34682140
pii: children8100875
doi: 10.3390/children8100875
pmc: PMC8534467
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
J Pediatr Urol. 2011 Oct;7(5):516-9
pubmed: 20926348
J Pediatr Urol. 2015 Apr;11(2):90.e1-5
pubmed: 25791422
J Urol. 1976 Nov;116(5):638-43
pubmed: 978818
BJU Int. 2006 Apr;97(4):805-8
pubmed: 16536778
J Pediatr Urol. 2013 Feb;9(1):71-6
pubmed: 22212178
J Urol. 1985 Dec;134(6):1172-5
pubmed: 4057410
Urology. 2002 Nov;60(5):894-7; discussion 898
pubmed: 12429323
Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1984 Jul 7;289(6436):7-9
pubmed: 6428669
Actas Urol Esp (Engl Ed). 2018 Jun;42(5):331-337
pubmed: 29397210
BJU Int. 2000 Apr;85(6):641-5
pubmed: 10759657
Can Urol Assoc J. 2015 May-Jun;9(5-6):202-6
pubmed: 26225173
Pediatr Surg Int. 2010 May;26(5):509-13
pubmed: 20140734
Adv Urol. 2011;2011:309626
pubmed: 21603212
J Urol. 2007 Mar;177(3):1124-8; discussion 1128-9
pubmed: 17296428
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2018 Nov;28(11):1408-1411
pubmed: 30036128
Ther Adv Urol. 2009 Aug;1(3):131-41
pubmed: 21789061
J Urol. 1990 Aug;144(2 Pt 2):531-3; discussion 545
pubmed: 2197438
Curr Med Res Opin. 2007 Sep;23 Suppl 4:S15-20
pubmed: 17931480
J Urol. 2007 Feb;177(2):710-4; discussion 714-5
pubmed: 17222662
Korean J Urol. 2010 Feb;51(2):128-31
pubmed: 20414426
Urologe A. 1981 Sep;20(5):263-4
pubmed: 7197421
J Urol. 2014 Dec;192(6):1794-9
pubmed: 24928269
Pediatrics. 2008 Dec;122 Suppl 5:S240-50
pubmed: 19018048
J Pediatr Urol. 2017 Apr;13(2):130-138
pubmed: 27889221
J Pediatr Surg. 2017 Dec;52(12):2066-2069
pubmed: 28927982