Antenatal Detection of Pelviureteric Junction Stenosis: Main Controversies

Although renography has been used for half a century to evaluate the function of the infant kidney, there are still important disagreements among the specialists involved in this particular pathology. Each department of nuclear medicine has his own way to acquire and process a renogram; to interpret the obtained images, curves, and quantitative parameters; and to make recommendations for the referring physician. The urologist has his or her part of responsibilities because the decision for operating or not operating varies from one center to another and is generally determined by a series of unproven assumptions. The aim of the present work is to focus on the main controversies involving both the nuclear medicine physician and the urologist.Concerning the technique of renography. The bladder catheter, systematically recommended in different centers, can best be replaced in most of the cases by a much less-invasive procedure, namely the acquisition and processing of late postmicturition (PM) posterect images. The change of patient's position contributes strongly to the renal washout. Intravenous hydration is used to standardize the level of hydration. However, the patients, in most of the cases, are in good health, and adequate oral hydration is sufficient. Even if hydration was not ideal when the procedure began, the administration of furosemide and the late PM images will result in a very good drainage of a normal kidney. Any renal tracer with high extraction rate is adequate, but diethylene triamine pentaacetic acid (99mTc-DTPA) does not allow a precise estimation of differential function in children younger than 6 months. The moment of furosemide injection (F0, F+20, F-15) does not influence the quality of the final renal washout, and the F0 procedure is recommended in cases of known hydronephrosis because it shortens the time of acquisition on the gamma camera and allows the simultaneous injection of both the tracer and the diuretic. Background correction remains controversial among nuclear medicine physicians. Including in the background area some liver and spleen activity, which are responsible for an important part of the extrarenal activity within the renal area, will improve the quality of the renogram curve, suppressing almost completely the initial vascular phase. The supporters of the Rutland-Patlak (R-P) fit for calculating differential function state that the vascular component is eliminated better than with use of the classical integral method. However, this method is based on a slope, with counting statistics being rather poor in infants with immature function. In most of the cases, the integral method will provide robust results. Determination of the same differential function by the use of both methods increases the level of confidence of the final results. It is generally admitted that the first renogram in children with antenatally detected hydronephrosis should be performed at approximately 1 month of age. However, there is a tendency to start earlier, and even in the first days of life, in case of huge hydronephrosis. The renogram should be repeated in case of significant hydronephrosis, significant increase of dilation, poor response to furosemide, or low initial differential function. Moderate dilation associated with normal differential function can probably be monitored by ultrasound alone. T½ of the diuretic curve is an empiric parameter that does not take into account the bladder emptying and the change of patient's position. Output efficiency (OE) and normalized residual activity (NORA), measured on the late PM and posterect images, represent physiological parameters not dependent on the input function of the considered kidney and can be used whatever the moment of furosemide injection. There is presently no way to quantitatively measure cortical transit in antenatally detected pelviureteric junction syndrome; all methods are limited by the slight kidney motion related to respiratory movements and by the almost-complete superimposition between cortical area and collecting system. The best approach probably is a visual estimation.Concerning the position of the urologist. The main controversy is related to the definition of obstruction and the indication for surgery. Neither the degree of hydronephrosis nor the impairment of differential function and/or the quality of the response to furosemide can define which kidney is in danger of further deterioration. Alternatively, these parameters are unable to predict for which kidneys an improvement of differential function can be expected because of a pyeloplasty. It has not been excluded, according to recent published work, that cortical transit could be a better predictive factor of the risk of a conservative attitude or the benefits of a surgical procedure, but this procedure has still to be confirmed.