[Should morphology of the upper pole in renal duplication with preserved function and associated ureterocele be taken into account during treatment planning?].

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to assess structural changes of the upper pole in renal duplication with coexisting ureterocele with regard to primary and/or secondary lesions. These changes might be of importance in treatment planning.

MATERIAL AND

METHODS

The material of this study consisted of clinical documentation and results of histopathology of 23 upper poles removed due to renal duplication with coexisting ureterocele. The qualification criterion was preserved function of the upper pole seen with 99mTc-DTPA (99mTechnetium diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid)/99mTc-DMSA (99mTechnetium dimercaptosuccinic acid). Resection of the upper pole was indicated in patients with recurrent urinary tract infections and/or persistent vesicoureteral reflux to the lower pole following endoscopic surgery of the ureterocele and/or low function of the upper pole. Morphological lesions were classified as primary (dysplasia) or secondary lesions. The patients were operated at the Department of Pediatric and Oncologic Surgery, PMU, in 1990-2008.

RESULTS

The study group consisted of 17 girls and 6 boys aged from 4 months to 9 years (mean 40 months). Recurrent urinary tract infections noted in 16 (70%) children were the most frequent indication for surgery. The preoperative mean function of the renal poles assessed with DTPA/DMSA represented 6% of the differential renal function. Dysplasia was identified in eight resected renal poles (34%) with coexisting secondary lesions in three of them. Secondary lesions only were seen in 15 poles (66%). There was no correlation between age and incidence of dysplasia during follow-up (Pearson's correlation coefficient r = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Secondary lesions are a quite frequent finding in resected upper poles. As 66% of the renal poles studied with histopathology revealed secondary lesions only, we believe that renal sparing treatment is justified in cases of urinary duplication with coexisting ureterocele.