The obstructive effect of the posterior urethral valve (PUV) can manifest along a spectrum of severity, ranging from disease incompatible with postnatal life to conditions that have such minimal impact that they may not manifest until later in life.
To compare the outcome of patients with PUV underwent both techniques of PUV incision and primary urinary diversion (with a delayed PUV incision).
PATIENTS AND METHODS:
A prospective and retrospective study of twenty-eight children with posterior urethral valve was conducted. Details of age, presenting symptoms, serum creatinine, ultrasound and Voiding cystographic (VCUG) findings, the presence or absence of vesicoureteric reflux and the type of surgical interventions done were recorded. On the follow-up between 1- 2 year period, the patients were assessed by progression of the clinical state, biochemical analysis and ultrasound of the abdomen. Outcomes of surgery and further surgical intervention also assessed in addition to the assessment of the bladder function for older children.
The primary treatment of the PUV was with incision of the PUV in 13 cases (46.4%) while the primary treatment with urinary diversion and delayed incision of the PUV was performed in 15 cases (53.3%). A posterior urethral valve incision was cured in 46% of patients, while the primary diversion and the delayed incision operation was cured in 26.6%; Most of the patients (60.7%) still needed further urological intervention. There was no statistical significance between the results of both surgical procedures. Renal impairment and poor bladder function were more common with diversion operation.
There is no convincing evidence to support any procedure as a way of improving long-term renal function or long-term bladder function. Therefore, urinary diversion is to be considered in selected cases with clear goals and endpoints in mind as it has an important place in the management of boys with PUV.
KEYWORDS: posterior urethral valve, posterior urethral valve incision, vesicostomy, uretero stomy.