INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Heminephroureterectomy (HN) is our treatment of choice in a duplex system with non-functioning moiety. We examined the need for endoscopic incision (EI)/bladder reconstructive surgery (BRS) and whether ureteroceles and/or vesicoureteric reflux (VUR) influenced management options. METHODS: Retrospective study of patients undergoing HN by a single surgeon (2003-2008). Patients were classified according to the presence (Group 1) or absence (Group 2) of ureterocele. The groups were subdivided with coexisting dilating VUR (a) or not (b). Statistical analysis included Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Thirty-one children were identified. Seventeen (54.8%) had ureterocele (Group 1) and 14 patients had no ureterocele (Group 2). Group 1 had eight with VUR (1a) and nine without (1b). Group 2 had seven with VUR (2a) and seven without (2b). Significantly more patients with ureterocele required EI/BRS (p = 0.006). Five (29%) in Group 1 required BRS versus none in Group 2 (p = 0.04). Six (75%) in Group 1a underwent EI/BRS versus three (33%) in Group 1b (p = 0.15). Significantly more in Group 1a required EI prior to HN versus Group 1b (p = 0.04). Similar numbers of patients required BRS in Groups 1a and 1b (p = 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of ureterocele, there is minimal likelihood of requiring surgery apart from HN, independent of VUR. Presence of ureterocele is an indicator for additional procedure within the bladder. There is a higher incidence of EI when ureterocele co-exists with dilating VUR.
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Heminephroureterectomy (HN) is our treatment of choice in a duplex system with non-functioning moiety. We examined the need for endoscopic incision (EI)/bladder reconstructive surgery (BRS) and whether ureteroceles and/or vesicoureteric reflux (VUR) influenced management options. METHODS: Retrospective study of patients undergoing HN by a single surgeon (2003-2008). Patients were classified according to the presence (Group 1) or absence (Group 2) of ureterocele. The groups were subdivided with coexisting dilating VUR (a) or not (b). Statistical analysis included Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Thirty-one children were identified. Seventeen (54.8%) had ureterocele (Group 1) and 14 patients had no ureterocele (Group 2). Group 1 had eight with VUR (1a) and nine without (1b). Group 2 had seven with VUR (2a) and seven without (2b). Significantly more patients with ureterocele required EI/BRS (p = 0.006). Five (29%) in Group 1 required BRS versus none in Group 2 (p = 0.04). Six (75%) in Group 1a underwent EI/BRS versus three (33%) in Group 1b (p = 0.15). Significantly more in Group 1a required EI prior to HN versus Group 1b (p = 0.04). Similar numbers of patients required BRS in Groups 1a and 1b (p = 0.61). CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of ureterocele, there is minimal likelihood of requiring surgery apart from HN, independent of VUR. Presence of ureterocele is an indicator for additional procedure within the bladder. There is a higher incidence of EI when ureterocele co-exists with dilating VUR.