Did our current initial treatment practice change after EAU/ESPU vesicoureteral reflux risk grouping?

Abstract

Background/PurposeThe “European Association of Urology (EAU) Guidelines on Vesicoureteral Reflux (VUR) in Children (September 2012)” established risk classification by analyzing and defining risk factors for each patient. In this study we aimed to investigate how our initial treatment procedures were affected by EAU/ESPU guideline vesicoureteral reflux risk grouping and to compare the early clinical results of treatments performed before and after the risk classification in our patients with VUR. Materials and methods334 renal units with regular clinical follow-up who were treated owing to VUR (vesicoureteral reflux) between years 2009 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative clinical parameters such as grade and laterality of reflux, presence of renal scar, initial and follow-up treatments, findings of medical treatment and surgical procedures were analyzed. The initial medical and surgical methods were compared by categorizing patients according to risk groups before and after 2013. ResultsMean age and follow-up duration were 71.4(6–216) months and 47(4–141) months, respectively. Among the preoperative parameters, only high EAU risk group (p = 0.01) and treating lower urinary tract symptoms (p < 0.001) were determining the postoperative success rates significantly, while age, sex, and presence of renal scar at DMSA were not affecting the success of treatment significantly. While no significant difference in medical and surgical treatment rates is observed after risk grouping system in low risk group, the percentages of patients who are treated with surgical methods initially were significantly decreased in moderate and high risk groups (p = 0.002 and p = 0.012, respectively). We determined that VUR risk grouping did not change clinical success significantly in all risk groups. ConclusionsDespite the fact that EAU/ESPU VUR risk classification changed our current practice in terms of initial treatment method, this different approach did not seem to affect early clinical success positively. There is still an absolute need for studies with larger sample size and long-term follow-up to reach more reliable results. Type of studyTherapeutic. Level of evidenceLevel 4.