ANALYSIS OF FACTORS AFFECTING RENAL FUNCTION IN PATIENTS WITH HYDRONEPHROSIS DUE TO URETEROPELVIC JUNCTION STENOSIS
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: To analyze factors affecting renal function in patients with hydronephrosis due to ureteropelvic junction stenosis.
Subjects and Methods: A retrospective review of patient records of hydronephrosis due to ureteropelvic junction stenosis at the Urology Department, National Children's Hospital, from January 2016 to December 2023. The outcome variable was renal function, and the prognostic variables were age, gender, and anterior-posterior renal pelvis diameter. Linear regression analysis was used to identify risk factors affecting renal function, with p < 0.05 indicating statistical significance.
Results: The study included 120 patients with unilateral hydronephrosis; the majority had left hydronephrosis (79 patients, 65.8%). Male patients accounted for the majority (93 patients, 77.5%). Age and gender were not associated with decreased renal function (p > 0.05). Renal function in the group with an anterior-posterior pelvis diameter > 40 mm was lower than in the group with a diameter between 20 and 30 mm (p < 0.001); renal function was 38.9 ± 9.9% and 45.8 ± 7.9%, respectively. This group had a 4.1 times higher risk of renal function below 40% compared to the group with an anterior-posterior pelvis diameter between 20-30 mm, 95% [1.58–10.88], p = 0.004.
Conclusion: Renal function decreases as the anteroposterior diameter of the renal pelvis increases. The group with an anteroposterior diameter of the renal pelvis > 40 mm had a higher incidence of reduced renal function than the group with an anteroposterior diameter between 20 and 30 mm, and the risk of reduced renal function by < 40% was 4.1 times higher.
Keywords
hydronephrosis, renal ultrasound, functional renal scintigraphy.
Article Details
References
2. Madden-Fuentes R.J, McNamara E.R, Nseyo U et al (2014). Resolution rate of isolated low-grade hydronephrosis diagnosed within the first year of life. J Pediatr Urol, 10(4): 639-44.
3. Capolicchio J.P, Braga L.H and Szymanski K.M (2018). Szymanski, Canadian Urological Association/Pediatric Urologists of Canada guideline on the investigation and management of antenatally detected hydronephrosis. Can Urol Assoc J, 12(4): 85-92.
4. Chertin B, Pollack A, Koulikov D et al (2006). Conservative treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children with antenatal diagnosis of hydronephrosis: lessons learned after 16 years of follow-up. Eur Urol, 49(4): 734-8
5. Ross S.S, Kardos S, Krill A et al (2011). Observation of infants with SFU grades 3-4 hydronephrosis: worsening drainage with serial diuresis renography indicates surgical intervention and helps prevent loss of renal function. J Pediatr Urol, 7(3): 266-71
6. Onen A (2007). An alternative grading system to refine the criteria for severity of hydronephrosis and optimal treatment guidelines in neonates with primary UPJ-type hydronephrosis. J Pediatr Urol, 3(3): 200-5.
7. Longpre M, Angela Nguan, Macneily A.M et al (2012). Prediction of the outcome of antenatally diagnosed hydronephrosis: a multivariable analysis. J Pediatr Urol, 8(2): 135-9.
8. Kohno M, Ogawa T, Kojima Y et al (2020). Pediatric congenital hydronephrosis (ureteropelvic junction obstruction): Medical management guide. Int J Urol, 2020. 27(5): p. 369-376.
9. Rianthavorn P and Limwattana S (2015). Diagnostic accuracy of neonatal kidney ultrasound in children having antenatal hydronephrosis without ureter and bladder abnormalities. World J Urol, 33(10): 1645-50.
10. Dhillon H.K (1998). Prenatally diagnosed hydronephrosis: the Great Ormond Street experience. British Journal of Urology, 81, Suppl2: 39 - 44.