Abstract

Background:To compare the results of final renal function by two methods of treatment in patients diagnosed as posterior urethral valve (PUV) (valve ablation vs. vesicostomy).Materials and Methods:Fifty-four boys diagnosed with PUV participated in this study. They were divided into top two groups. Thirty-one of the total were treated with primary valve fulguration (Group 1) and 23 were treated with vesicostomy (Group 2). One-year-creatinine level and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) were measured. Also, they were taken ultrasonography detecting hydronephrosis. Data analysed in IBM SPSS21 with t-test and Chi-square test. Presented with 95% of confidence intervals.Results:Fifty-four boys diagnosed with PUV participated in this study. The mean age of patients in Group 1 was 3.8 ± 1.48 days and Group 2 was 4.7 ± 1.85 days. One-year Cr level was 1.57 ± 1.45 in Group 1 and 1.57 ± 1.45 in Group 2 which was not statistically significant (P < 0.8). Also 1-year GFR level was 31.1 ± 4.4 in Group 1 and 33 ± 4.7% in Group 2 (P < 0.10/23) in Group 2 (43.47%) had severe hydronephrosis and 14/31 (45.16%) in Group 1 had severe hydronephrosis. Graded ultrasound results were not significantly different (P = 0.24).Conclusion:The results showed no significant difference. Vesicostomy might be a more favourable method due to less complication and follow-up in early neonatal life. Hence, the condition of the patients and decision of the surgeon are effective parameters in choosing an optimal method in patients diagnosed with PUV.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call