Literature DB >> 27555682

Comment on: Kumar et al. Follow-up imaging after pediatric pyeloplasty. Indian J Urol, 2016;32:221-226.

V V S Chandrasekharam1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2016        PMID: 27555682      PMCID: PMC4970395          DOI: 10.4103/0970-1591.185094

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Urol        ISSN: 0970-1591


× No keyword cloud information.
Pyeloplasty is one of the common operations in pediatric urologic practice. However, there is no clear consensus on the follow-up of children after pyeloplasty: What tests, when, how many times, and for how long? These are the questions that need to be answered. There are two main reasons for follow-up testing: To confirm the success of pyeloplasty and to assess the function of the operated kidney. Ultrasound (USG) examinations, 3–6 months after surgery, are considered sufficient for follow-up, especially to ascertain the success of the operation.[1] A recent survey in the United States has shown that USG is the most common, and in many cases, the only test used for postpyeloplasty follow-up in children.[2] In kidneys with initial impaired function, a postoperative diuretic renogram (DR) may be obtained at a later date. Long ago, we demonstrated that kidney function after successful pyeloplasty continued to improve up to 1 year and then reached a plateau, without any further improvement at 5-year follow-up.[3] Thus, if a DR is done after pyeloplasty, it may be better to delay it till 1 year. The authors of this paper tried to answer these very questions about post-pyeloplasty follow-up. They should be congratulated for the excellent follow-up of a large number of children after pyeloplasty. They performed multiple DR studies post-pyeloplasty. The only problem is that DR in children requires intravenous cannulation and bladder catheterization (for a well-tempered study) and definitely poses some risk of radiation to the child. I agree with the authors that a single post-operative DR is sufficient. The authors seem to rely more on DR than on USG for follow-up. The reasons cited are that USG is operator-dependent, and reducing the size of the dilated pelvis would influence the validity of post-operative USG. Conversely, one could argue that pelvic reduction during routine pyeloplasty is unnecessary,[456] and standard grading of hydronephrosis would ensure good inter- and intra-observer validity.[78] Most importantly, the first postoperative USG could be used as a baseline for further follow-up. Thus, one cannot completely do away with USG for post-pyeloplasty follow-up; in kidneys with good pre-operative function, USG may be the only test required for follow-up. In our practice, we perform a USG 3 months after pyeloplasty, followed by DR at about 1 year after the surgery, to allow for assessment of maximal functional improvement of the operated kidney.[9] Further follow-up is continued with yearly USG only. Finally, I wish that all surgeons develop a strict follow-up protocol for their patients so that many more good scientific papers can be published from the subcontinent in future.
  9 in total

1.  Functional outcome after pyeloplasty for unilateral symptomatic hydronephrosis.

Authors:  V V Chandrasekharam; M Srinivas; C S Bal; A K Gupta; S Agarwala; D K Mitra; V Bhatnagar
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 1.827

2.  Comparison of the reliability of two hydronephrosis grading systems: the Society for Foetal Urology grading system vs. the Onen grading system.

Authors:  S-Y Kim; M-J Kim; C S Yoon; M S Lee; K H Han; M-J Lee
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 2.350

3.  Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in infants: single-surgeon experience.

Authors:  V V S Chandrasekharam
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 1.830

4.  National Trends in Followup Imaging after Pyeloplasty in Children in the United States.

Authors:  Ryan S Hsi; Sarah K Holt; John L Gore; Thomas S Lendvay; Jonathan D Harper
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2015-04-11       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Renal pelvis reduction during dismembered pyeloplasty: is it necessary?

Authors:  Hany A Morsi; Khaled Mursi; Ahmed Y Abdelaziz; Mohammed S Elsheemy; Mohamed Salah; Mohamed A Eissa
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2012-03-27       Impact factor: 1.830

6.  Miniature pyeloplasty as a minimally invasive surgery with less than 1 day admission in infants.

Authors:  Abdol-Mohammad Kajbafzadeh; Ali Tourchi; Behtash Ghazi Nezami; Mahshid Khakpour; Amir-Abbas Mousavian; Saman Shafaat Talab
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2011-04-27       Impact factor: 1.830

7.  Inter-rater reliability of postnatal ultrasound interpretation in infants with congenital hydronephrosis.

Authors:  V M Vemulakonda; D T Wilcox; M R Torok; A Hou; J B Campbell; A Kempe
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2015-08-08       Impact factor: 2.370

8.  Early postoperative ultrasound after open pyeloplasty in children with prenatal hydronephrosis helps identify low risk of recurrent obstruction.

Authors:  Rodrigo L P Romao; Walid A Farhat; Joao L Pippi Salle; Luis H P Braga; Victor Figueroa; Darius J Bägli; Martin A Koyle; Armando J Lorenzo
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-10-22       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Pelvic reduction during pyeloplasty for antenatal hydronephrosis: does it affect outcome in ultrasound and nuclear scan postoperatively?

Authors:  Berk Burgu; Evren Suer; Ozgu Aydogdu; Tarkan Soygur
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2009-12-29       Impact factor: 2.649

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.