Factors That Would Indicate The Diagnosis Of Dilating Vur In The Second Vcug

\n PURPOSE
\n             The aim of this study is to analyze if there were any factors that would indicate the diagnosis of dilating vesicoureteric reflux (VUR) (≥ grade 3) in the second voiding cystourethrogam (VCUG) of children with a normal first VCUG.

\n MATERIAL AND METHODS
\n             Patients who underwent VCUG between 2012 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Within the cohort, patients who required more than one VCUG were abstracted and those with an abnormal first VCUG (VUR, posterior urethral valve, etc.) were excluded. Factors such as; age, gender, lower urinary tract dysfunction (LUTD), renal scarring, recurrent urinary tract infection, abnormal ultrasonography findings (bladder abnormalities/variable degrees of hydronephrosis), and technical problems (absence of voiding phase) were noted. Mann-Whitney U test was used for continuous variables whereas Chi Square test was used for categorical values.

\n RESULTS
\n             A total of 25 patients were found to have undergone more than 1 VCUG (19 girls, 6 boys; mean age 6 ± 3 years). Median time period between the two VCUGs were 12 months (range 1 – 72 months). VUR was detected in 11 patients, while dilating VUR was discovered in 7 patients. Among those, 6 patients were diagnosed with bilateral VUR. Recurrent UTI was found to be the only factor that would indicate dilating VUR in the second VCUG (p=0,049). Interestingly, no VUR was detected in cases that were performed after a first VCUG with inadequate technique. 

\n
\n CONCLUSION

\n             Recurrent UTI was shown to be the sole factor that would indicate the diagnosis of dilating VUR in the second VCUG. In our study, 28% patients with a normal first VCUG were shown to have dilating VUR in the second study. Therefore, in recurrent febrile UTI, second VCUG should be considered in patients with a normal previous imaging.
\n