4.4 Article

Renal anomalies in family members of infants with bilateral renal agenesis/adysplasia

Journal

PEDIATRIC NEPHROLOGY
Volume 22, Issue 1, Pages 52-56

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00467-006-0295-z

Keywords

duplicated collecting systems; renal malformations; renal dysplasia; embryologic stressor; Potter's facies; renal ultrasound

Funding

  1. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [K23HL070823] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [R01DK070907] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  3. NHLBI NIH HHS [K23HL70823] Funding Source: Medline
  4. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK070907] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Renal agenesis/adysplasia is the leading etiology of end stage renal disease in children. The etiology for renal agenesis/adysplasia has not been identified. The purpose of the present study was to determine if renal agenesis/adysplasia occur in a familial pattern. Twenty seven cases of bilateral renal agenesis/adysplasia were identified by review of autopsy records, and four were excluded. A male excess of 2.8:1 was noted with a mean gestation of 35 weeks. Prenatal and family histories were obtained on 11/23 families. Potential embryologic stressors were identified in 8/11 pregnancies. Thirty-four 1st and 2nd degree relatives from five families participated in a renal ultrasound exam. An increased prevalence of congenital renal anomalies was identified in the relatives of index patients with bilateral renal agenesis/adysplasia (14.7%) compared to controls (2.2%), with a recurrence risk of 6.2 for 1st degree relatives. The most frequently identified renal anomalies in the family members were solitary kidneys and duplicated collecting systems. The increased prevalence of a range of renal anomalies within affected families raises the possibility that isolated renal malformations result from unidentified gene-environment interactions.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available