AIM: Risk of @entity69863 (VUR) overtreatment was anticipated following introduction of endoscopic treatment (ET). New tool reduces hospitalization and @entity1 discom-fort, with good results and parental preferences may prevail on questions about benefits of treatment. The authors analyzed two series of @entity1 to evaluate impact of ET on management. METHODS: Two hundred sixty-four @entity1 were selected; group A (90 cases) were observed and treated before adoption of ET. Group B included 174 @entity1 who benefited of ET (Deflux). Treatment started from grade III ( @entity281 or @entity8 ). Lower refluxes were treated only in association to an higher grade in the other kidney. 81 ureters were reinplanted in Group A (92% success rate); 67 ureters were reinplanted in group B (98% sr) and 115 had a ET (89% sr). Rate of treatment, time of follow up and age at operation were compared. RESULTS: No differences were found in order to reflux grade distribution, treatment rate and time spent waiting for spontaneous before reinplant or ET. ET was a first choice procedure, for grade III, in group B. Reinplant continued to have a role for grade IV cases, which responded to ET in 85%, and for grade V. Spontaneous resolution was observed respectively in 29% and 30% (grade III) and 13% and 7% (grade IV). CONCLUSIONS: Despite ET is accessible and effective, there are no evidences that extensive indications are of any benefit. Enthusiasm for new tools must be submitted to the need for long term, prospective studies to support our indications.

Endoscopic subureteral injection for XXXX and the risk of overtreatment.

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients'] @entity281 :: ('MESH:D007239', 'Disease') :: ['infections'] @entity8 :: ('MESH:D007674', 'Disease') :: ['renal damage'] @entity69863 :: ('54113', 'Gene') :: ['vesicoureteral reflux']
@entity69863 :: (54113,Gene) :: ['vesicoureteral reflux']
