Comparison between Retrograde and Antegrade ureteric stenting during open Dismembered Pyeloplasty in children with Pelvi-Ureteric Junction Obstruction | ||
| Kerbala Journal of Medicine | ||
| Article 1, Volume 7, Issue 2, December 2014, Pages 1959-1963 PDF (0 K) | ||
| Author | ||
| Jasim abdoalhasan | ||
| Abstract | ||
| ackground: Congenital UPJ obstruction can present at any time, from intrauterine life to old age. With the increased use of prenatal ultrasound, anumber of infants are found to have hydronephrosis. PUJ obstruction is one ofthe most common causes of prenatal hydronephrosis Objective: To compare between retrograde and antegrade internal double-J stent for open Dismembered pyeloplasty in children with Pelvi-Ureteric Junction Obstruction. Patients and Methods: Thirty two patients with pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction were included in the study from December 2011 to December 2013. . Antegrade double-J stent was done in 13 children and retrograde double-J stent was done in 19 children . Antegrade stent was placed during the pelviureteral anastomosis, and the retrograde stent was placed just before the operation by pediatric cystoscopy. The length of hospital stay and postoperative results were assessed. Results: Thirty two patients with pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction , aged 3 months to 12 years, with a mean age of 3.4 years were studied. Successful stent placement without malpositioning was achieved in 11 (84.4%) of 13 patients in antegrade group and all 19 (100%) of children in retrograde group . The cause of unsuccessful stenting in antegrade group was the inability to cross the ureterovesical junction . Conclusion: Retrograde double-J stent more reliable than antegrade stent for open dismember pyeloplasty in children with Pelvi-Ureteric Junction Obstruction with greater success and lower complication rates. Abbreviations: PUJO (Pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction). US (Ultrasonography). IVU (Intravenous urography). KUB (kidney-ureter-bladder). DJ stent (double j stent) | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 59 PDF Download: 46 |
||