Evaluation of Renal Histopathological Changes, as a Predictor of Recoverability of Renal Function Following Pyeloplasty for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction.
Nephrourol Mon 2015;
7:e28051. [PMID:
26539416 PMCID:
PMC4628209 DOI:
10.5812/numonthly.28051]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2015] [Revised: 04/11/2015] [Accepted: 04/12/2015] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background:
Pyeloplasty is a widely accepted treatment for ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). However, the renal function recoverability after pyeloplasty is still a matter of debate. Different parameters have been used to predict renal functional recoverability after corrective surgery, with conflicting results.
Objectives:
In this study, renal biopsy was carried on a series of cases of UPJO, during pyeloplasty, to study the extent of histological alterations in renal parenchyma, as a result of obstruction, and its predictive value in renal function recoverability after pyeloplasty.
Patients and Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed the renal biopsy obtained during pyeloplasty in 53 adult patients. Histopathological changes were graded on a scale of 1 to 3, according to their severity, and compared with the differential renal function (DRF) revealed on the preoperative and postoperative follow up diethylene triamine pentaacetic acid (DTPA) renal scan. A Fischer’s t test was used to evaluate statistical differences between values.
Results:
This study showed a linear relationship between the severity of histological changes and renal function recovery, after pyeloplasty. Out of 24 obstructed renal units (ORU), with minimal histopathological changes (grade I), 21 ORU (87.5%), with > 35% DRF preoperatively, showed significant improvement in renal function after 12 months of pyeloplasty (P < 0.05). On the other hand, all kidneys (n = 29) with moderate to severe obstructive changes (grade II and III) had minimal improvement in DRF, after pyeloplasty, which was clinically insignificant (P > 0.05). Renal function deterioration after pyeloplasty was not observed in any of the cases.
Conclusions:
The severity of pathological changes in renal parenchyma, due to UPJO, is a good predictor of renal function recoverability, after pyeloplasty. The ORUs, with DRF > 35%, usually have normal (grade I) renal biopsy and might be expected to present better functional recoverability after pyeloplasty.
Collapse