Familial vesicoureteral reflux: a study of 16 families

Familial vesicoureteral reflux

PURPOSE

Vesicoureteral reflux is known to occur in families. We summarized worldwide data on the incidence and nature of vesicoureteral reflux in siblings of children with vesicoureteral reflux.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched MEDLINE using the words siblings vesicoureteral reflux, familial vesicoureteral reflux, offspring vesicoureteral reflux and vesicoureteral reflux screening. All articles that we identified that were published from 1972 to 2002 were analyzed for the incidence of renal damage in siblings of patients with vesicoureteral reflux.

RESULTS

Siblings of patients with vesicoureteral reflux have a much higher incidence of reflux than the normal population. There is a direct relationship of patient age to the incidence and severity of reflux. Most investigators advocate screening asymptomatic siblings of patients with vesicoureteral reflux.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of sibling reflux is significant. When vesicoureteral reflux is discovered in symptomatic siblings, it is usually high grade and associated with a high incidence of reflux nephropathy. Randomized controlled studies are needed to compare renal damage in patients with reflux detected through screening to renal damage in those diagnosed after urinary tract infection to establish how much renal damage may be prevented by screening in asymptomatic siblings.

Scintigraphic screening for renal damage in siblings of children with symptomatic primary vesico-ureteric reflux

OBJECTIVE

To define prospectively the incidence of renal parenchymal lesions in the siblings of patients treated at one institution for primary vesico-ureteric reflux (VUR).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 1997 to October 1998, a prospective study including renal scintigraphy (using dimercaptosuccinic acid, DMSA) and a radionuclide cystogram was proposed systematically to the asymptomatic siblings of children treated for primary VUR. The radionuclide cystograms were interpreted as showing the presence or absence of VUR and the DMSA scan as symmetrical or asymmetrical differential function, with or with no renal defect.

RESULTS

Fifty-five families gave informed consent, of whom 46 completed the study (eight refused secondarily and one was omitted by exclusion criteria), representing 46 symptomatic patients and 65 siblings. There were 17 siblings with VUR (26%) including two of 13 infants and 15 of 52 children aged > 18 months. One radionuclide cystogram failed. Of the 17 refluxing siblings, four had a history of symptomatic urinary tract infection; 62 of the 65 siblings had a DMSA scan, of which 56 were normal and six (10%) showed abnormalities (five asymmetrical differential function and one parenchymal defect). Only one of these six patients had VUR at the time of the evaluation and only one had a small kidney detected by ultrasonography on one side (and no VUR). There were no adverse effects associated with screening.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms a significant overall incidence of VUR (26%) in the asymptomatic siblings of patients treated for primary VUR. From the results of the DMSA scan (only one sibling had a parenchymal defect), the systematic screening of asymptomatic siblings does not appear to be beneficial.

Autosomal dominant optic nerve colobomas, vesicoureteral reflux, and renal anomalies

We describe a father and 3 sons with optic nerve colobomas, vesicoureteral reflux, and renal anomalies. The youngest son had congenital renal failure and ultimately underwent renal transplantation. The father and one son had high frequency hearing loss. There were no other affected relatives. We conclude that the association of optic nerve colobomas, renal anomalies, and vesicoureteral reflux comprises a unique autosomal dominant syndrome. Molecular investigations have determined this disorder to be associated with a single nucleotide deletion in the PAX2 gene.