OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficiency of magnetic resonance urography (MRU) in pediatric urology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We report retrospectively on 12 children who underwent MRU between January 1999 and November 2001. MRU was performed to accurately evaluate the entire urinary tract because of megaureter, ectopic ureter, vesicoureteral reflux, Y-inverted duplication and hydronephrosis because of pyeloureteral stenosis. T1- and T2-weighted images were obtained in the coronal, sagittal and axial planes. The mean age of the children (8 females, 4 males) investigated was 36 months (range 2-140 months). RESULTS: An accurate anatomical picture of the entire urinary tract could be obtained in all children. The obstructive nature of megaureter could be differentiated. The distal orifice of ectopic ureter could be identified in the vagina. Vesicoureteral reflux into the blind-ending ureteral bud of a duplicated system was accurately identified. Hydronephrosis was demonstrated to be the result of pyeloureteral stenosis. The location of stenoses was easily identified in the sagittal and coronal planes. CONCLUSIONS: MRU is an excellent imaging modality for accurately depicting the urinary tract. MRU is superior to conventional intravenous urography because it does not use ionizing radiation, the gadolinium contrast medium used is not nephrotoxic and the imaging quality is excellent, reproducible and not interfered with by gas superposition. Considering the high costs and diagnostic benefit of MRU compared to intravenous urography, MRU should be performed in patients with impaired renal function, in those with an allergy to contrast medium and if anatomic relationships are not clear prior to reconstructive surgery.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficiency of magnetic resonance urography (MRU) in pediatric urology. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We report retrospectively on 12 children who underwent MRU between January 1999 and November 2001. MRU was performed to accurately evaluate the entire urinary tract because of megaureter, ectopic ureter, vesicoureteral reflux, Y-inverted duplication and hydronephrosis because of pyeloureteral stenosis. T1- and T2-weighted images were obtained in the coronal, sagittal and axial planes. The mean age of the children (8 females, 4 males) investigated was 36 months (range 2-140 months). RESULTS: An accurate anatomical picture of the entire urinary tract could be obtained in all children. The obstructive nature of megaureter could be differentiated. The distal orifice of ectopic ureter could be identified in the vagina. Vesicoureteral reflux into the blind-ending ureteral bud of a duplicated system was accurately identified. Hydronephrosis was demonstrated to be the result of pyeloureteral stenosis. The location of stenoses was easily identified in the sagittal and coronal planes. CONCLUSIONS: MRU is an excellent imaging modality for accurately depicting the urinary tract. MRU is superior to conventional intravenous urography because it does not use ionizing radiation, the gadolinium contrast medium used is not nephrotoxic and the imaging quality is excellent, reproducible and not interfered with by gas superposition. Considering the high costs and diagnostic benefit of MRU compared to intravenous urography, MRU should be performed in patients with impaired renal function, in those with an allergy to contrast medium and if anatomic relationships are not clear prior to reconstructive surgery.