PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare cure rates and complications of polydimethylsiloxane (Macroplastique(R)) and dextranomer/hyaluronic acid copolymer (Deflux(R)) in the treatment of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April 2001 to March 2008, 29 boys and 42 girls (total of 115 ureters) with a mean age of 6 years who had undergone endoscopic subureteral transurethral injection for VUR were enrolled. A single subureteral injection of Macroplastique was performed in 31 ureters in 23 children (group I; grade II: 4; grade III: 12; grade IV: 9; grade V: 6), and a single subureteral injection of Deflux was performed in 84 ureters in 48 children (group II; grade II: 24; grade III: 14; grade IV: 25; grade V: 21). Renal ultrasound was done 1 day after injection, and voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) was done at 3 months. Successful reflux correction was defined as absent or grade I reflux on follow-up VCUG. RESULTS: No significant difference in success rates was observed between group I and group II [80.6% (25/31) vs. 78.6% (66/84), respectively, p>0.05]. The following postoperative complications developed: ureteral obstruction in 2 ureters of group I and 3 ureters of group II, asymptomatic urinary tract infection in 3 patients of group I and 2 patients of group II, and bladder calcification by erosion or mucosal necrosis in 2 patients of group I. CONCLUSIONS: Despite differences in material properties, both Macroplastique and Deflux were safe for the treatment of children with VUR. Because of the risk of bladder mucosal necrosis and substantial decreases in volume after implantation, long-term follow-up is required.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare cure rates and complications of polydimethylsiloxane (Macroplastique(R)) and dextranomer/hyaluronic acid copolymer (Deflux(R)) in the treatment of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April 2001 to March 2008, 29 boys and 42 girls (total of 115 ureters) with a mean age of 6 years who had undergone endoscopic subureteral transurethral injection for VUR were enrolled. A single subureteral injection of Macroplastique was performed in 31 ureters in 23 children (group I; grade II: 4; grade III: 12; grade IV: 9; grade V: 6), and a single subureteral injection of Deflux was performed in 84 ureters in 48 children (group II; grade II: 24; grade III: 14; grade IV: 25; grade V: 21). Renal ultrasound was done 1 day after injection, and voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) was done at 3 months. Successful reflux correction was defined as absent or grade I reflux on follow-up VCUG. RESULTS: No significant difference in success rates was observed between group I and group II [80.6% (25/31) vs. 78.6% (66/84), respectively, p>0.05]. The following postoperative complications developed: ureteral obstruction in 2 ureters of group I and 3 ureters of group II, asymptomatic urinary tract infection in 3 patients of group I and 2 patients of group II, and bladder calcification by erosion or mucosal necrosis in 2 patients of group I. CONCLUSIONS: Despite differences in material properties, both Macroplastique and Deflux were safe for the treatment of children with VUR. Because of the risk of bladder mucosal necrosis and substantial decreases in volume after implantation, long-term follow-up is required.
Authors: Biagio Barone; Luigi De Luca; Luigi Napolitano; Vincenzo Francesco Caputo; Mariano Marsicano; Gennaro Cancelmo; Massimiliano Creta; Ferdinando Fusco Journal: Asian J Urol Date: 2022-03-17