Renal function outcomes in pediatric patients with symptomatic reflux into the transplanted kidney treated with redo ureteroneocystostomy.

INTRODUCTION: Asymptomatic post-renal transplant reflux is common but only 5-10% patients are diagnosed with vesico-ureteral reflux in the setting of post-transplant febrile urinary tract infections, requiring redo ureteroneocystostomy (redo-UNC). Here we report the renal function outcomes of 37 such patients, stratified by lower urinary tract (LUT) status. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that those with pre-transplant LUT dysfunction would have lower glomerular filtration rate (GFR) on follow-up. STUDY DESIGN: Using procedure codes, 37 patients who underwent renal transplant followed by redo-UNC for transplant reflux at our institution between 1991 and 2014 were identified. Patient characteristics and GFR levels from four different time points were recorded. Comparisons were made between those with and without LUT dysfunction, using Fisher's exact, Wilcoxon rank sum, or signed-rank tests. Generalized estimating equations were constructed to account for the clustered nature of GFR within each LUT group and to assess their change over time. RESULTS: Twelve patients (32%) had pre-transplant LUT dysfunction. The proportion of males in this group was significantly higher (75% vs. 32%, p = 0.032), and there was no statistical difference towards presenting earlier with post-transplant reflux (1.4 vs. 2.3 years, p = 0.087). After an average of 4.9 years, the median GFRs were similar between the two groups (53 mg/dL vs. 58 mg/dL, p = 0.936). There was no significant difference in GFR at this last follow-up time point in patients with and without LUT dysfunction. DISCUSSION: Vesicoureteral reflux in the setting of renal transplantation is common and doesn't often require repair. In our series, we found that those with LUT dysfunction did not present statistically sooner with symptomatic transplant reflux. Longer-term follow-up did show a decline in GFR but did not reveal a difference in GFR in patients' with and without LUT dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric post-transplant GFR after open redo ureteral reimplant decreases over time in similar fashion in patients with symptomatic reflux regardless of whether they have LUT dysfunction or normal anatomy. Vigilance should apply to the recognition, treatment, and follow-up of all symptomatic transplant reflux regardless of LUT status.

Scar acceptance after pediatric urologic surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergo pediatric urologic surgery as infants and young children. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the evolution of surgical scars over several years in order to inform parents and surgeons on the true cosmetic impact of pediatric surgery and evaluate patient scar satisfaction. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study where patients who have undergone urologic surgery at a young age are evaluated years later for scar satisfaction via an abbreviated validated questionnaire. Scar length currently was measured and compared with immediate postoperative scar length to assess for growth. RESULTS: Eighty-two children were evaluated with a median age (interquartile range) at the time of surgery and at the time of the study of 1 year (0.6-3 years) and 7 years (3-11 years), respectively. Pyeloplasty (48.8%), ureteral reimplantation/ureterocele reconstruction (41.5%) and other (9.8%) surgical techniques were included. No bother was reported in 84.0% of families. Surgical approach (robotic/laparoscopic vs. open) did not influence whether families reported very pleased/pleased versus neutral/somewhat bothered attitudes (p = 0.094). At time of surgery median scar length for all open surgical approaches (N = 65) was 4 cm (IQR 4-4.5 cm) and at time of the study scars were 6 cm (IQR 5-8 cm). For laparoscopic incisions, median length at time of surgery was 0.8 cm (IQR 0.8-1.1 cm) and at a mean follow up time of 2.3 years median scar length was 1.1 cm (IQR 1-1.5 cm). By race, Asian experienced the lowest percent change in scar length 0.3%, then Caucasian 0.8%, Latino 1.4% and self-described other ethnicity 2.0%. DISCUSSION: As predicted, scars grow in length over time in either open or minimally surgical approaches. Depending on patient race, scar growth varied. Regardless, survey results did not vary based on surgical approach, type of surgery or race of survey taker Summary figure. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of families are pleased with overall scar appearance after undergoing major pediatric urologic surgery. Scars tend to grow in length overtime with less growth noted in Asian children and flank incisions.