3.8 Article

The influence of interstitial cells of Cajal density in the outcomes of pyeloplasty in adults: A prospective analysis

Journal

UROLOGIA JOURNAL
Volume 90, Issue 1, Pages 30-35

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/03915603221107470

Keywords

Interstitial cells of Cajal; pyeloplasty; ureteropelvic obstruction; outcomes; laparoscopic

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Patients with high ICC density experience significant improvement in hydronephrosis following pyeloplasty, but ICC density is not associated with functional outcomes.
Purpose: To evaluate if the density of interstitial cells of Cajal (ICC) in the ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) influences the outcomes of pyeloplasty in adults. Methods: Twenty-three patients with the diagnosis of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) that underwent laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty were included. ICC density was measured using immunohistochemistry reaction for c-KIT expression in the resected UPJ segment. Pyeloplasty outcome was evaluated by patient self-report pain, urinary outflow using DTPA renogram and hydronephrosis assessment using ultrasound (US) at 12 months of follow-up. A logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the association of pyeloplasty outcomes and ICC density. Results: Low, moderate, and high ICC density were present in 17.4%, 30.4%, and 52.2% of the patients, respectively. Complete pain resolution was observed in 100%, 85.7%, and 75% of patients with low, moderate and high ICC density, respectively (p = 0.791). DTPA renogram improved in 75%, 85.7%, and 91.7% of patients with low, moderate and high ICC density, respectively (p = 0.739). Hydronephrosis improved in 25%, 85.7%, and 91.7% of patients with low, moderate and high ICC density, respectively (p = 0.032). Conclusions: Patients with high ICC density have a significant amelioration of hydronephrosis after pyeloplasty. However, ICC density is not associated with functional outcomes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available