A systematic review of outcomes of Deflux® treatment for vesicoureteral reflux following pediatric renal transplantation.

INTRODUCTION

Vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) after renal transplant in the pediatric population may be associated with an increased incidence of urinary tract infection (UTIs) leading to increased morbidity, including graft dysfunction and graft loss. The non-orthotopic location of the transplanted ureter, and lack of submucosal tunnel may pose challenges in correcting the VUR using endoscopic injection techniques. Herein we report the results of a systematic review evaluating the outcomes of endoscopic treatment of VUR using Deflux® in this population.

METHODS

Pubmed and Embase databases were searched from October 2001 to April 2019. Full-text English articles involving patients less than 18 years old at the time of transplant, with a diagnosis of VUR post-transplantation, who underwent Deflux® treatment were included. Figure 1 outlines our PRISMA-compliant search strategy.

RESULTS

We found 6 eligible studies describing Deflux® treatment outcomes in 67 pediatric patients with post-transplant VUR where voiding cystourethrogram (VCUG) confirmed the diagnosis and resolution of VUR. The mean success rate was 36.8%. Ureteral obstruction occurred in 7/67 cases (10.4%). In all these 7 cases of obstruction, ureteric stenting was the initial management, but was only successful in 1 patient. Open ureteroneocystostomy (UNC) was performed in 4/7 cases, while 2/7 were managed expectantly (unknown outcomes). Persistent VUR with UTI despite Deflux® were reported in 20 out of 67 cases. Of these, 7 were managed with prophylactic antibiotics, and 13 with UNC. Success rates were consistently low for UNC after failed Deflux® in comparison to redo UNC in transplant ureters without prior injection.

CONCLUSION

Low success rates are seen following injection techniques for VUR after pediatric renal transplant. Although an appealing option, Deflux® may prove counterintuitive due to the high rate of obstruction and suboptimal results if open reimplantation is required. A multi-institutional prospective study with a larger population size may further elucidate these results.