Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  156 / 238 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 156 / 238 Next Page
Page Background

156

29

th

CONGRESS OF THE ESPU

S21: NEUROPATHIC BLADDER

Moderators: Anju Goyal (UK), Erik Van Laecke (Belgium)

ESPU Meeting on Saturday 14, April 2018, 08:10–09:10

08:10–08:13

S21-1 (PP)

DOES THE INTRODUCTION OF CLEAN INTERMITTENT

CATHETERIZATION AND ANTIMUSCARINIC THERAPY

IN THE NEWBORN PERIOD PRESERVE RENAL FUNCTION

IN CHILDREN WITH SPINA BIFIDA?

Annarita MARINO 

1

, Salvatore CASCIO 

1

, Orla MCMAHON 

1

, Emer ALDRIDGE 

1

and

Malcolm LEWIS 

2

1) Children's University Hospital, Department of paediatric surgery and urology, Dublin, IRELAND -

2) Children's University Hospital, Department of paediatric nephrology, Dublin, IRELAND

PURPOSE

It is still a matter of debate among paediatric urologists when clean intermittent catheterization (CIC)

and antimuscarinic therapy should be introduced in children with spina bifida. The aim of this study

was to assess if late introduction of CIC was associated with a higher incidence of renal damage.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We reviewed data on all patients with open myelomeningocele who attended the Spina Bifida Clinic.

In group 1 patients were started on CIC and antimuscarinic therapy after birth and in group 2 CIC

was introduced after their first birthday. Renal damage was assessed using DMSA scan and eGFR

calculated with the Schwartz formula.

RESULTS

104 patients were identified, 39 in group 1 and 65 in group 2. The mean age at the introduction of

CIC was 0 in group 1 and 42 months in group 2. All children in group 1 had a normal eGFR while

2(3 %) had abnormal eGFR in group 2 (p=ns). DMSA scan showed renal damage in 3(6 %) of those

in group 1 compared with 13 (20 %) of group 2 (p=ns). There was no difference in the incidence of

unilateral or bilateral VUR (20 % group 1, 12 % group 2).

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst there was more renal damage on DMSA in group 2, there was less reflux on cystography in

this group. These differences did not reach statistical significance. We have not been able to show

that the current practice of early institution of CIC and antimuscarinic therapy has a renal protective

effect in our cohort of patients.