Cargando…

Endoscopic Subureteral Injection for the Treatment of Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children: Polydimethylsiloxane (Macroplastique®) versus Dextranomer/Hyaluronic Acid Copolymer (Deflux®)

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare cure rates and complications of polydimethylsiloxane (Macroplastique®) and dextranomer/hyaluronic acid copolymer (Deflux®) in the treatment of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April 2001 to March 2008, 29 boys and 42 girls (total...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bae, Young Dae, Park, Min Gu, Oh, Mi Mi, Moon, Du Geon
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Urological Association 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2855475/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20414426
http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2010.51.2.128
_version_ 1782180188429221888
author Bae, Young Dae
Park, Min Gu
Oh, Mi Mi
Moon, Du Geon
author_facet Bae, Young Dae
Park, Min Gu
Oh, Mi Mi
Moon, Du Geon
author_sort Bae, Young Dae
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare cure rates and complications of polydimethylsiloxane (Macroplastique®) and dextranomer/hyaluronic acid copolymer (Deflux®) in the treatment of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April 2001 to March 2008, 29 boys and 42 girls (total of 115 ureters) with a mean age of 6 years who had undergone endoscopic subureteral transurethral injection for VUR were enrolled. A single subureteral injection of Macroplastique was performed in 31 ureters in 23 children (group I; grade II: 4; grade III: 12; grade IV: 9; grade V: 6), and a single subureteral injection of Deflux was performed in 84 ureters in 48 children (group II; grade II: 24; grade III: 14; grade IV: 25; grade V: 21). Renal ultrasound was done 1 day after injection, and voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) was done at 3 months. Successful reflux correction was defined as absent or grade I reflux on follow-up VCUG. RESULTS: No significant difference in success rates was observed between group I and group II [80.6% (25/31) vs. 78.6% (66/84), respectively, p>0.05]. The following postoperative complications developed: ureteral obstruction in 2 ureters of group I and 3 ureters of group II, asymptomatic urinary tract infection in 3 patients of group I and 2 patients of group II, and bladder calcification by erosion or mucosal necrosis in 2 patients of group I. CONCLUSIONS: Despite differences in material properties, both Macroplastique and Deflux were safe for the treatment of children with VUR. Because of the risk of bladder mucosal necrosis and substantial decreases in volume after implantation, long-term follow-up is required.
format Text
id pubmed-2855475
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher The Korean Urological Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28554752010-04-22 Endoscopic Subureteral Injection for the Treatment of Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children: Polydimethylsiloxane (Macroplastique®) versus Dextranomer/Hyaluronic Acid Copolymer (Deflux®) Bae, Young Dae Park, Min Gu Oh, Mi Mi Moon, Du Geon Korean J Urol Original Article PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare cure rates and complications of polydimethylsiloxane (Macroplastique®) and dextranomer/hyaluronic acid copolymer (Deflux®) in the treatment of vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April 2001 to March 2008, 29 boys and 42 girls (total of 115 ureters) with a mean age of 6 years who had undergone endoscopic subureteral transurethral injection for VUR were enrolled. A single subureteral injection of Macroplastique was performed in 31 ureters in 23 children (group I; grade II: 4; grade III: 12; grade IV: 9; grade V: 6), and a single subureteral injection of Deflux was performed in 84 ureters in 48 children (group II; grade II: 24; grade III: 14; grade IV: 25; grade V: 21). Renal ultrasound was done 1 day after injection, and voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) was done at 3 months. Successful reflux correction was defined as absent or grade I reflux on follow-up VCUG. RESULTS: No significant difference in success rates was observed between group I and group II [80.6% (25/31) vs. 78.6% (66/84), respectively, p>0.05]. The following postoperative complications developed: ureteral obstruction in 2 ureters of group I and 3 ureters of group II, asymptomatic urinary tract infection in 3 patients of group I and 2 patients of group II, and bladder calcification by erosion or mucosal necrosis in 2 patients of group I. CONCLUSIONS: Despite differences in material properties, both Macroplastique and Deflux were safe for the treatment of children with VUR. Because of the risk of bladder mucosal necrosis and substantial decreases in volume after implantation, long-term follow-up is required. The Korean Urological Association 2010-02 2010-02-18 /pmc/articles/PMC2855475/ /pubmed/20414426 http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2010.51.2.128 Text en Copyright © The Korean Urological Association, 2010 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Bae, Young Dae
Park, Min Gu
Oh, Mi Mi
Moon, Du Geon
Endoscopic Subureteral Injection for the Treatment of Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children: Polydimethylsiloxane (Macroplastique®) versus Dextranomer/Hyaluronic Acid Copolymer (Deflux®)
title Endoscopic Subureteral Injection for the Treatment of Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children: Polydimethylsiloxane (Macroplastique®) versus Dextranomer/Hyaluronic Acid Copolymer (Deflux®)
title_full Endoscopic Subureteral Injection for the Treatment of Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children: Polydimethylsiloxane (Macroplastique®) versus Dextranomer/Hyaluronic Acid Copolymer (Deflux®)
title_fullStr Endoscopic Subureteral Injection for the Treatment of Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children: Polydimethylsiloxane (Macroplastique®) versus Dextranomer/Hyaluronic Acid Copolymer (Deflux®)
title_full_unstemmed Endoscopic Subureteral Injection for the Treatment of Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children: Polydimethylsiloxane (Macroplastique®) versus Dextranomer/Hyaluronic Acid Copolymer (Deflux®)
title_short Endoscopic Subureteral Injection for the Treatment of Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children: Polydimethylsiloxane (Macroplastique®) versus Dextranomer/Hyaluronic Acid Copolymer (Deflux®)
title_sort endoscopic subureteral injection for the treatment of vesicoureteral reflux in children: polydimethylsiloxane (macroplastique®) versus dextranomer/hyaluronic acid copolymer (deflux®)
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2855475/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20414426
http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2010.51.2.128
work_keys_str_mv AT baeyoungdae endoscopicsubureteralinjectionforthetreatmentofvesicoureteralrefluxinchildrenpolydimethylsiloxanemacroplastiqueversusdextranomerhyaluronicacidcopolymerdeflux
AT parkmingu endoscopicsubureteralinjectionforthetreatmentofvesicoureteralrefluxinchildrenpolydimethylsiloxanemacroplastiqueversusdextranomerhyaluronicacidcopolymerdeflux
AT ohmimi endoscopicsubureteralinjectionforthetreatmentofvesicoureteralrefluxinchildrenpolydimethylsiloxanemacroplastiqueversusdextranomerhyaluronicacidcopolymerdeflux
AT moondugeon endoscopicsubureteralinjectionforthetreatmentofvesicoureteralrefluxinchildrenpolydimethylsiloxanemacroplastiqueversusdextranomerhyaluronicacidcopolymerdeflux