Efficiency of endoscopic treatment compared to open surgical management of the vesicoureteral reflux
Sažetak
EFFICIENCY OF ENDOSCOPIC TREATMENT COMPARED TO OPEN SURGICAL MANAGEMENT OF THE VESICOURETERAL REFLUX
University of Belgrade, School of Medicine
Institute for Mother and Child Health Care of Serbia ˝Dr Vukan Čupić˝, Belgrade
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) represents the retrograde flow of urine from the bladder to the upper urinary tract. It can be managed by continuous antibiotic prophylaxis of the urinary tract infections until spontaneous resolution occurs, surgical ureteral reimplantation (ureteroneocystostomy), or endoscopic treatment by injecting bulking agents.
The aim: To assess the efficacy of the endoscopic treatment of VUR in comparison to the ureteroneocystostomy.
Material and methods: The first group included 300 children with VUR, II to IV grades managed by endoscopic injection from 2005 to 2015, and second group included 300 patients who underwent surgical treatment for the IV or V grade of VUR from 1997 until 2009. The results of treatment and complication rate were analysed and compared. We did the same analyses considering the total number of ureteral units.
Results: Of total of 300 patients treated endoscopically, in 281 (93.67%) patients the reflux was completely resolved; in 10 (3.33%), the reflux was downgraded (decreased for one or two grades) and in 9 (3%) the intervention was unsuccessful. In 430 ureteral units, full resolution was achieved in 402 (93.49%) units; in 10 (2.33%), the reflux was downgraded and in 18 (4.65%) the reflux didn’t resolve.
In 300 patients who underwent open surgery, in 290 (96.7%) the reflux was resolved; in 8 (2.67%), the reflux was downgraded from the V/IV to the grades I to III; in 2 (0.66%) the operation was unsuccessful. Out of 480 ureteral units, in 463 (96.46%) units the reflux was resolved; in 13 (2.71%), the grade of reflux was reduced, while in 4 (0.83%) units the reflux was persistent.
Recorded success rate didn’t show any statistically significant difference between these two groups. The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter and the number of complications was fewer in the group of patients treated by endoscopic injection.
Conclusion: Comparable success rate, shorter hospital stay, and fewer complications make the endoscopic treatment more preferable option.
Key words: Vesicoureteral reflux, Endoscopic treatment, Ureteral reimplantation
EFIKASNOST ENDOSKOPSKE METODE LEČENJA U ODNOSU NA OTVORENU HIRURŠKU KOREKCIJU VEZIKOURETERALNOG REFLUKSA
SAŽETAK
Uvod: Vezikureteralni refluks (VUR) predstavlja retrogradni tok urina iz bešike do gornjih delova urinarnog trakta. Može se lečiti kontinuiranom antibiotskom profilaksom urinarnih infekcija do spontane rezolucije, otvorenom hirurškom reimplantacijom uretera ili endoskopskim tretmanom pomoću injekcije endopaste.
Cilj: Studije efikasnosti endoskopske metode lečenja VURa u odnosu na otvorenu hiruršku korekciju VUR-a.
Materijal i metode: Prvu grupu pacijenata čini 300 pacijenata tretiranih endoskopskom injekcijom zbog VUR-a II do IV gradusa od 2005. do 2015.god. Drugu grupu pacijenata sačinjava 300 pacijenata lečenih od 1997. do 2009. god. otvorenom hirurškom reimplanacijom uretera zbog VUR-a IV i V stepena. Rezultati lečenja i učestalost komplikacija kod ove dve grupe pacijenata su analizirani i upoređeni. Takođe, urađena je i analiza u odnosu na ukupan broj ureteralnih jedinica.
Rezultati: Od ukupno 300 pacijenata koji su tretirani endoskopski, kod 281 (93,67%) pacijenta refluks je kompletno saniran; kod 10 (3,33%) pacijenata smanjen je stepen refluksa (za jedan ili dva stepena) i kod 9 (3%) pacijenata intervencija je bila potpuno neuspešna. Od 430 ureteralnih jedinica, uspešan tretman refluksa je postignut kod 402 (93,49%) uretera; kod 10 (2,33%) stepen refluksa bio je snižen i kod 18 (4,65%) refluks je i dalje bio prisutan.
Od 300 pacijenata podvrgnutih otvorenoj hirurgiji, kod 290 (96,67%) refluks V/IV gradusa je kompletno izlečen; kod 8 (2,67%) slučajeva snižen je stepen sa V/IV na I, II ili III stepen refluksa i kod 2 (0,66%) pacijenta operacija je bila neuspešna. Od 480 ureteralnih jedinica, kod 463 (96,46%) jedinica refluks je izlečen, kod 13 (2,71%), operacija je smanjila stepen VUR-a, dok je kod 4 (0,83%) uretera refluks ostao perzistentan. Rezultati nisu pokazali statistički značajnu razliku između ove dve grupe pacijenata u stepenu uspešnosti lečenja refluksa. Dužina boravka u bolnici je kraća, a učestalost komplikacija manja kod pacijenata lečenih endoskopskom intervencijom.
Zaključak: Podjednaka uspešnost lečenja, kraći boravak u bolnici i manje komplikacija dovelo je do toga da endoskopski tretman postane metod izbora u lečenju VUR-a u odnosu na klasični hirurški tretman.
Ključne reči: vezikoureteralni refluks, endoskopski tretman, reimplantacija uretera
Reference
Jacobson SH, Hansson S, Jakobsson B. Vesico-ureteric reflux: occurrence and long-term risks. Acta Paediatr Suppl. 1999;88(431):22-30.
Rivilla F. Endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteral reflux in a paediatric surgery ambulatory unit. J Minim Access Surg. 2011;7(2):132-5.
Ransley PG, Risdon RA. The pathogenesis of reflux nephropathy. Contrib Nephrol. 1979;16:90-7.
Smellie JM. Reflections on 30 years of treating children with urinary tract infections. J Urol. 1991;146(2 ( Pt 2)):665-8.
Shanon A, Feldman W. Methodologic limitations in the literature on vesicoureteral reflux: a critical review. J Pediatr. 1990;117(2 Pt 1):171-8.
Olbing H. Vesico-uretero-renal reflux and the kidney. Pediatr Nephrol. 1987;1(4):638-46.
Smellie JM, Jodal U, Lax H, Mobius TT, Hirche H, Olbing H. Outcome at 10 years of severe vesicoureteric reflux managed medically: Report of the International Reflux Study in Children. J Pediatr. 2001;139(5):656-63.
Wan J, Greenfield SP, Talley M, Ng M. An analysis of social and economic factors associated with followup of patients with vesicoureteral reflux. J Urol. 1996;156(2 Pt 2):668-72.
Peters CA, Skoog SJ, Arant BS, Jr., Copp HL, Elder JS, Hudson RG, et al. Summary of the AUA Guideline on Management of Primary Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children. J Urol. 2010;184(3):1134-44.
Biocic M, Todoric J, Budimir D, Cvitkovic Roic A, Pogorelic Z, Juric I, et al. Endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteral reflux in children with subureteral dextranomer/hyaluronic acid injection: a single-centre, 7-year experience. Can J Surg. 2012;55(5):301-6.
Puri P, Pirker M, Mohanan N, Dawrant M, Dass L, Colhoun E. Subureteral dextranomer/hyaluronic acid injection as first line treatment in the management of high grade vesicoureteral reflux. J Urol. 2006;176(4 Pt 2):1856-9; discussion 9-60.
Puri P, Kutasy B, Colhoun E, Hunziker M. Single center experience with endoscopic subureteral dextranomer/hyaluronic acid injection as first line treatment in 1,551 children with intermediate and high grade vesicoureteral reflux. J Urol. 2012;188(4 Suppl):1485-9.
Hsieh MH, Madden-Fuentes RJ, Lindsay NE, Roth DR. Treatment of pediatric vesicoureteral reflux using endoscopic injection of hyaluronic acid/dextranomer gel: intermediate-term experience by a single surgeon. Urology. 2010;76(1):199-203.
Chandrasekharam VV. Endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteric reflux with dextranomer/hyaluronic acid copolymer (Deflux): Single-surgeon experience with 48 ureters. Indian J Urol. 2013;29(3):173-6.
Chung PH, Lan LC, Wong KK, Tam PK. Deflux injection for the treatment of vesicoureteric reflux in children--a single centre's experience. Asian J Surg. 2009;32(3):163-6.
Puri P, Ninan GK, Surana R. Subureteric Teflon injection (STING). Results of a European survey. Eur Urol. 1995;27(1):71-5.
Puri P, Granata C. Multicenter survey of endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteral reflux using polytetrafluoroethylene. J Urol. 1998;160(3 Pt 2):1007-11; discussion 38.
Elmore JM, Scherz HC, Kirsch AJ. Dextranomer/hyaluronic acid for vesicoureteral reflux: success rates after initial treatment failure. J Urol. 2006;175(2):712-5.
Chertin B, Puri P. Endoscopic management of vesicoureteral reflux: does it stand the test of time? Eur Urol. 2002;42(6):598-606; discussion
Kirsch AJ, Perez-Brayfield M, Smith EA, Scherz HC. The modified sting procedure to correct vesicoureteral reflux: improved results with submucosal implantation within the intramural ureter. J Urol. 2004;171(6 Pt 1):2413-6.
Kirsch AJ, Perez-Brayfield MR, Scherz HC. Minimally invasive treatment of vesicoureteral reflux with endoscopic injection of dextranomer/hyaluronic acid copolymer: the Children's Hospitals of Atlanta experience. J Urol. 2003;170(1):211-5.
Puri P, Chertin B, Velayudham M, Dass L, Colhoun E. Treatment of vesicoureteral reflux by endoscopic injection of dextranomer/hyaluronic Acid copolymer: preliminary results. J Urol. 2003;170(4 Pt 2):1541-4; discussion 4.
Nordenström J, Sjöström S, Sillén U, Sixt R, Brandström P The Swedish infant high-grade reflux trial: UTI and renal damage. J Pediatr Urol. 2017 Feb 2. p: S1477-5131
Nordenström J, Holmdahl G, Brandström P, Sixt R, Stokland E, Sillén U, Sjöström S.
Lendvay TS, Sorensen M, Cowan CA, Joyner BD, Mitchell MM, Grady RW. The evolution of vesicoureteral reflux management in the era of dextranomer/hyaluronic acid copolymer: a pediatric health information system database study. J Urol. 2006;176(4 Pt 2):1864-7.
Johnston DL, Qureshi AH, Irvine RW, Giel DW, Hains DS. Contemporary Management of Vesicoureteral Reflux. Curr Treat Options Pediatr. 2016 Jun;2(2):82-93
Kurtz MP, Leow JJ, Varda BK, Logvinenko T, McQuaid JW, Yu RN, Nelson CP, Chung BI, Chang SL. The Decline of the Open Ureteral Reimplant in the United States: National Data From 2003 to 2013. Urology. 2017 Feb;100:193-19
Nevéus T, Brandström P, Linnér T, Jodal U, Hansson S. Parental experiences and preferences regarding the treatment of vesicoureteral reflux. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2012 Feb;46(1):26-30.
Tran GN, Bodapati AV, Routh JC, Saigal CS, Copp HL Parental Preference Assessment for Vesicoureteral Reflux Management in Children. J Urol. 2017 Mar;197(3 Pt 2):957-962