Symptomatic bilateral delayed partial ureteral obstruction after bilateral endoscopic correction of vesicoureteral reflux with dextranomer/hyaluronic acid polymer

Endoscopic treatment of primary vesicoureteral reflux in children with two different bulking agents, high success and low complication rates: Comparison of Dexell and Vantris

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

To compare the results in terms of efficacy and safety of the endoscopic management for vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) in two different standardized primary VUR cohorts treated with Dexell and Vantris.

PATIENTS

128 refluxing renal units (RRU) in 87 patients with primary VUR (64 females, 23 males). Patients with secondary VUR and severe bladder and bowel dysfunction were excluded. A total of 22 continent children with mild bladder-bowel dysfunction underwent bladder-bowel training before the implantation. All procedures were performed in the presence of sterile urine using a conventional subureteral transurethral injection technique.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between groups in terms of mean age, sex, RRU side, ^99mTc-DMSA uptake, and reflux grade. The overall resolution rates based on the number of RRUs for up to three endoscopic treatments were 80% (56/70) in Dexell group and 94.8% (55/58) in Vantris group (P = .012). No postoperative recurrences or vesicoureteral junction obstructions were seen in any group.

CONCLUSIONS

Dexell and Vantris provided an effective and safe endoscopic VUR treatment in the early and mid-term follow up of children with primary VUR. The effectiveness of these substances, which can produce different mass effects with different particle sizes, in safe VUR resolution, needs further investigations.

Endoscopic treatment of primary vesicoureteral reflux in children with two different bulking agents, high success and low complication rates: comparison of Dexell and Vantris

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

To compare the results in terms of efficacy and safety of the endoscopic management for vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) in two different standardized primary VUR cohorts treated with Dexell and Vantris.

PATIENTS

128 refluxing renal units (RRU) in 87 patients with primary VUR (64 females, 23 males). Patients with secondary VUR and severe bladder and bowel dysfunction were excluded. A total of 22 continent children with mild bladder-bowel dysfunction underwent bladder-bowel training before the implantation. All procedures were performed in the presence of sterile urine using a conventional subureteral transurethral injection technique.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between groups in terms of mean age, sex, RRU side, 99mTc-DMSA uptake, and reflux grade. The overall resolution rates based on the number of RRUs for up to three endoscopic treatments were 80% (56/70) in Dexell group and 94.8% (55/58) in Vantris group (p = 0.012). No postoperative recurrences or vesicoureteral junction obstructions were seen in any group.

CONCLUSIONS

Dexell and Vantris provided an effective and safe endoscopic VUR treatment in the early and mid-term follow up of children with primary VUR. The effectiveness of these substances, which can produce different mass effects with different particle sizes, in safe VUR resolution, needs further investigations.

Changing bulking agent may require change in injection volume for endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteral reflux

Introduction:

Various bulking agents were utilized for endoscopic correction of VUR. A study reviewing multi-institutional data showed that the amount of injection material has increased over time with the purpose of improving success rates, which also resulted in costs. We noticed an opposite trend in our center since we started using a new bulking agent. The aim of this study was to evaluate evolution of our practice with different bulking agents.

Patients and Methods:

Records of VUR patients who underwent subureteric injection with polyacrylate polyalcohol copolymer (PPC) and dextronomere hyaluronic acide (DxHA) between 2005 and 2014 were reviewed. Variation of different parameters throughout the study period was evaluated along with the success rate. Success was defined as complete resolution of reflux.

Results:

A total of 260 patients with 384 refluxing units were included. The success rate was higher in PPC group compared to DxHA group. There was no statistically significant difference between years regarding distribution of VUR grade, body weight, patient height, and age in PPC group. Despite significant reduction in injection volume, success rate did not decrease through the years with PPC.

Conclusion:

Different bulking agents may require different injection volumes to achieve the same success rate in endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteral reflux. Habits gained with previous experience using other materials should be revised while using a new agent.

Incidence of ureterovesical obstruction and Cohen antireflux surgery after Deflux® treatment for vesicoureteric reflux

AIM

The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of ureteric obstruction (UB) and requirement for Cohen antireflux surgery (CAS) after Deflux^Ⓡ treatment (DT) for vesicoureteric reflux (VUR).

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2017, 494 ureters (VUR severity ≤ grade III: N=291 or >grade IV: N=203) were treated by DT at a mean age of 4.5 (range: 0.2-24) years. Epidural Catheter Assistance (ECA) was used to exclude UB by injecting diluted indigo carmine solution (1-3mL) into an epidural catheter inserted into a ureter after DT and confirming dye flow within 15min. ECA+: N=181 ureters; ECA-: N=313 ureters.

RESULTS

In ECA+, UB was detected in 5/181 (2.7%) ureters (grade II: N=1, III: N=3, and IV: N=1) treated by leaving the ECA catheter in situ overnight (N=4) or double J stent (DJS) insertion for 1month (N=2). After mean follow-up of 1.9years, one grade III DJS case has residual grade II VUR. In ECA-, 3/313 (0.9%) cases developed UB. One resolved, and one required DJS. CAS was required for 17/494 (3.4%) ureters and hindered by DT in 5/17 (29.4%) ureters. All are sequelae-free after mean follow-up of 1.8years.

CONCLUSIONS

UB may be more frequent than reported (3.3% versus 0.6%-1.8%). ECA identifies potential UB.

TYPE OF STUDY

Treatment study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

The comparison of dextranomer/hyaluronic acid and polyacrylate-polyalcohol copolymers in endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteral reflux

BACKGROUND

Dextranomer/hyaluronic acid (Dx/Ha;Dexell®) and polyacrylate-polyalcohol copolymer (PPC;Vantris®) are the popular tissue-augmenting substances using for the endoscopic injections of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). The aim of the study is to evaluate and compare Dx/Ha and PPC in terms of effectiveness, injection techniques and complications with special emphasis on vesicoureteral junction obstruction (VUJO).

METHODS

A total of 95 patients who underwent endoscopic VUR treatment between 2009 and 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups: group 1: Patients underwent endoscopic treatment with PPC (n=50 patients, 70 renal refluxing units) group 2: Patients underwent endoscopic treatment with Dx/Ha (n=45 patients, 74 renal refluxing units).

RESULTS

The overall resolution rates based on the number of renal refluxing units studied was 88.6% and 70.3% in group 1 and group 2, respectively. Resolution rates were significantly better in group 1 compared to group 2. VUJO requiring ureteral reimplantation or stent insertion developed in 7 patients in group 1. No VUJO was observed in group 2. VUJO in group 1 was markedly higher than that in group 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic treatment of VUR with PPC promises better resolution rates but higher VUJO rates compared to Dx/Ha.

Does the modıfıed STING method increase the success rate in the management of moderate or hıgh-grade reflux?

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy of subureteral injection types in patients with middle- to high-grade vesicoureteral reflux (VUR).

Materials and Methods

Between June 1999 and September 2010, subureteral dextranomer was applied at our clinic to 149 patients (214 refluxing ureters) with grades II, III, and IV VUR. Group 1 consisted of 54 patients (80 ureters), and group 2 consisted of 95 patients (134 ureters). The standard subureteric transurethral injection (STING) procedure was applied to group 1, and the modified STING procedure was applied to group 2. A second and if needed a third injection was applied to unsuccessfully treated patients. The mean follow-up period was 2 years. Patients were evaluated by cystography and ultrasonography in the third month of follow-up.

Results

VUR was resolved completely after a single injection in 54/80 ureters (67.5%) in group 1 and in 94/134 ureters (70.1%) in group 2. Overall successes after a second or a third injection were 61/80 (76.2%) and 111/134 (82.8%), respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between the groups only for grade IV reflux following multiple injections (p<0.05).

Conclusions

Endoscopic treatment of VUR is a recommended treatment because it is minimally invasive, efficient, and repeatable. Our study confirmed that a modified STING procedure can be an alternative treatment to the standard technique.

Relevance of current guidelines in the management of VUR

In recent years, there have been fundamental changes in the understanding of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). This is reflected by current international guidelines that cover diagnosis, screening, and treatment of VUR. However, literature is still lacking and many questions are unsolved. In this article, we shortly review the important aspects of the current guidelines. Due to the lack of high-powered randomized controlled trials, guidelines often are based on an expert's opinion rather than evidence. In this review article, we address the controversies in the management of VUR; siblings and children with antenatally diagnosed hydronephrosis and the management of a patient with VUR.

CONCLUSION

With an individualized approach and patient risk stratification, the goal today must be to address the clinical problem, avoid unnecessary tests, and provide good quality of life for the patient and parents.