We have located links that may give you full text access.
Surgical outcome of patients with vesicoureteral reflux from a single institution in reference to the ESPU guidelines: a retrospective analysis.
Journal of Pediatric Urology 2019 Februrary
INTRODUCTION: Vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) is an anatomic or functional disorder, and it is a condition associated with renal scarring, hypertension, and end-stage renal disease. Renal damage can be prevented by appropriate medical and surgical intervention for selected patients.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to retrospectively analyze the surgically treated patient group of this study in reference to the risk analysis criteria used in European Association of Urology (EAU), European Society for Paediatric Urology (ESPU) guidelines to see the outcome of the study management protocol within the last 15 years in respect to this risk analysis.
STUDY DESIGN: A total of 686 patients who were operated upon in a single institution for VUR between 1997 and 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the criteria in EAU/ESPU guidelines, the patients were classified into three groups: low, medium, and high risk. Risk factors were compared between the groups.
RESULTS: The patient numbers for low, medium, and high risk were 92 (13.4%), 485 (70.7%), and 109 (15.9%), respectively. In the high-risk group, surgeons tended to do more ureteroneocystostomy (UNC) (82.6%), whereas in the low-risk group, surgeons tended to do more subureteric injection (STING) (76.1%). The success rates for STING and UNC were found to be 75% and 93%, respectively. Although there was a difference in success rates among patients treated with STING or UNC, this difference was not statistically significant in success rates regarding risk groups for patients treated with STING or UNC.
DISCUSSION: The most recent guideline was that which was published by the EAU/ESPU organization in 2012. This guideline is established based on the risk analysis. The analysis revealed that patients in the low-risk group tended to undergo endoscopic surgery treatment method, whereas patients in the high-risk group tended to undergo open surgery. Therefore, the study management over the last 10 years has been mainly in line with the current recommendations.
CONCLUSION: The analysis shows that when the patients are classified according to the EAU/ESPU risk classification, surgeons tended to perform more endoscopic and more open surgery for the low- and high-risk groups, respectively. Although each surgical modality had similar success rates in each group, open surgical results were overall much higher than those of endoscopic surgery in each group. This was a specifically important finding in high-risk group where the endoscopically treated group of patients was small in number, and the need for a definitive correction is essential in this group because of increased risk of renal injury.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to retrospectively analyze the surgically treated patient group of this study in reference to the risk analysis criteria used in European Association of Urology (EAU), European Society for Paediatric Urology (ESPU) guidelines to see the outcome of the study management protocol within the last 15 years in respect to this risk analysis.
STUDY DESIGN: A total of 686 patients who were operated upon in a single institution for VUR between 1997 and 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the criteria in EAU/ESPU guidelines, the patients were classified into three groups: low, medium, and high risk. Risk factors were compared between the groups.
RESULTS: The patient numbers for low, medium, and high risk were 92 (13.4%), 485 (70.7%), and 109 (15.9%), respectively. In the high-risk group, surgeons tended to do more ureteroneocystostomy (UNC) (82.6%), whereas in the low-risk group, surgeons tended to do more subureteric injection (STING) (76.1%). The success rates for STING and UNC were found to be 75% and 93%, respectively. Although there was a difference in success rates among patients treated with STING or UNC, this difference was not statistically significant in success rates regarding risk groups for patients treated with STING or UNC.
DISCUSSION: The most recent guideline was that which was published by the EAU/ESPU organization in 2012. This guideline is established based on the risk analysis. The analysis revealed that patients in the low-risk group tended to undergo endoscopic surgery treatment method, whereas patients in the high-risk group tended to undergo open surgery. Therefore, the study management over the last 10 years has been mainly in line with the current recommendations.
CONCLUSION: The analysis shows that when the patients are classified according to the EAU/ESPU risk classification, surgeons tended to perform more endoscopic and more open surgery for the low- and high-risk groups, respectively. Although each surgical modality had similar success rates in each group, open surgical results were overall much higher than those of endoscopic surgery in each group. This was a specifically important finding in high-risk group where the endoscopically treated group of patients was small in number, and the need for a definitive correction is essential in this group because of increased risk of renal injury.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app