La Pediatria Medica e Chirurgica (Oct 2020)

High-pressure balloon dilatation in children: our results in 30 patients with POM and the implications of the cystoscopic evaluation

  • Francesca Destro,
  • Giorgio Selvaggio,
  • Federica Marinoni,
  • Andrea Pansini,
  • Giovanna Riccipetitoni

DOI
https://doi.org/10.4081/pmc.2020.214
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 42, no. 1

Abstract

Read online

Primary Obstructive Megaureter (POM) is a common cause of hydronephrosis in children with spontaneous resolution in most cases. High-Pressure Balloon Dilatation (HPBD) has been proposed as a minimally invasive procedure for POM correction in selected patients. The aim of the paper is to review our experience with HPBD in patients with POM. We performed a retrospective study in a single Centre collecting data on patients’ demographics, diagnostic modalities, surgical details, results and follow-up. In particular, the endoscopic aspect of the orifice permitted the identification of 3 patterns: adynamic ureteral segment, stenotic ureteric ring and pseudoureterocelic orifice. We performed HPBD in 30 patients over 6 years. We had 23 patients with adynamic distal ureteral segment (type 1), 4 with stenotic ring (type 2) and 3 with ureterocelic orifice (type 3). In 3 patients (10%) the guidewire did not easily pass into the ureter requiring ureteral stenting or papillotomy. Post-operative course was uneventful. Five patients (3 pseudoureterocelic) required open surgery during follow-up. HPBD for the treatment of POM is a safe and feasible procedure and it can be a definitive treatment of POM. Complications are mainly due to double J stent and none of our patients had symptoms related to vescico-ureteral reflux. The aspect of the orifice, identified during cystoscopy, seems to correlate with the efficacy of the dilatation: type 1 and 2 are associated with good and excellent results respectively; type 3 do not permit dilatation in almost all cases requiring papillotomy. HPBD can be performed in selected patients of all paediatric ages as first therapeutic line. The presence of a pseudoureterocelic orifice or long stenosis might interfere with the ureteral stenting and seems associated with worse outcomes.

Keywords