A Case of Multicystic Dysplastic Kidney Presenting as a Single Midline Pelvic Cyst.

We present an unusual case of a female neonate presenting with a single midline pelvic cyst. Prenatal imaging was suggestive of multicystic dysplastic kidney (MCDK), but postnatal imaging was atypical for this diagnosis given the location and singular cyst noted. The patient ultimately underwent surgical exploration and was diagnosed with an ectopic MCDK. Ectopic MCDK should be considered in the differential diagnosis of unilocular cystic pelvic lesions identified in the perinatal period.

Surgical outcomes are equivalent after pure laparoscopic and robotic-assisted pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive (robotic and pure laparoscopic) pyeloplasty has been increasingly used for treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). However, few large-scale studies have compared these two modalities directly. METHODS: We performed a retrospective single-center review of all patients who underwent pure laparoscopic (LP) or robotic pyeloplasty (RALP) between 2007 and 2018. Patients were excluded if the initial surgery at our institution was a redo pyeloplasty or if they lacked follow-up information. Outcomes of interest included operative time, length of stay, and complication rates, including rates of secondary procedures. We compared these outcomes between groups using Student's t test for continuous variables and a Chi-square for categorical variables. RESULTS: A total of 282 patients were identified. Forty-eight were excluded based on study criteria; therefore, our total study cohort was 234 patients: 119 RALP and 115 LP cases. Overall mean postoperative follow-up time was 20.8 months, with no significant differences between groups. Mean operative time was shorter in the LP group when compared the RALP group (3 h 7 min vs. 3 h 41 min, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between groups in length of stay (1.22 days vs 1.50 days, p = 0.095). Complications occurred in 52 patients (22.2% of overall cohort) with no difference in incidence between groups. Twenty-five patients (14 in the RALP group and 11 in the LP group) underwent unplanned secondary procedures; 19 of these patients (9 in the RALP group and 10 in the LP group) needed a procedure to address secondary obstruction. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated no significant differences between RALP and LP in regards to complication rates. Surgeons performing RALP and LP have the potential to offer the same level of care for the surgical management of UPJO, especially in countries where robotic technology may not be readily available.

Normal pelvic ultrasound or MRI does not rule out neoplasm in patients with gonadal dysgenesis and Y chromosome material.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with gonadal dysgenesis (GD) with a Y chromosome have an increased risk of gonadal neoplasm. Few data exist on the ability of imaging to detect malignancy in intra-abdominal gonads in these patients. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the correlation between preoperative imaging findings and gonadal pathology in GD patients with Y chromosome material. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of patients with XY or XO/XY GD who underwent gonadectomy at our institution from 2003 to 2017. Patients were assessed preoperatively with ultrasonography; some additionally underwent MRI. RESULTS: The series consisted of 10 patients, all with female gender and non-palpable gonads. Median age was 13.1 years (range 2.4-18.3 years). Overall, four of the ten patients (40%) had a tumor (gonadoblastoma or dysgerminoma) on final pathology. Four patients had a gonad or gonads that were definitively seen on ultrasonography. All visualized gonads were described as "normal" or "small" with the exception of one patient, who had a normal MRI. Three of the four patients in this group had a tumor on final pathology. The remaining six patients had a gonad or gonads that were not definitively visualized on ultrasound; one patient in this group had a tumor on final pathology. Overall, five of seven gonads (71%) definitively visualized on ultrasound had tumor on final pathology, and two of thirteen gonads (15%) not visualized on ultrasound had tumor on final pathology; this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.012). Three patients were imaged with MRI. Of the gonads that could be visualized on MRI, no definitive abnormalities were seen. All patients imaged with MRI had tumors on final pathology. DISCUSSION: Both ultrasound and MRI are relatively poor at identifying and characterizing intra-abdominal gonads in GD patients. The majority of patients who had a neoplasm had normal imaging findings. Gonads that were definitively visualized on ultrasound were more likely to contain neoplasms that could not be visualized, which perhaps because of tumor growth. No other consistent imaging findings of malignancy were found. Our study included ultrasound evaluations that were completed over 10 years ago and not performed by pediatric ultrasonographers, which may have biased the results. However, results suggest that when discussing gonadectomy with GD patients, one should not be reassured by "normal" imaging findings. Neither ultrasound nor MRI should be relied on for surveillance in GD patients who decide against gonadectomy. CONCLUSION: A normal ultrasound or MRI does not rule out neoplasm in GD patients with intra-abdominal gonads.