References . | Type of study . | Patients, n . | Method of assessment . | Time points of assessment . | Renal function . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ünsal et al. [27] | RCT (three different dilatation techniques of percutaneous track) | 50 |
|
| No difference between groups and with baseline |
Moosanejad et al. [28] | RCT (postop ureteral stenting or not) | 84 | sCr |
| No difference between groups |
Chatham et al. [29] | Prospective observational | 19 |
|
| Stable or improved |
Moskovitz et al. [30] | Prospective observational | 87 | Tc-99 QDMSAa |
| Stable |
Kiliç et al. [31] | Prospective observational | 24 | CDUS |
| Stable |
Bayrak et al. [32] | Prospective observational | 80 |
|
| Improved (P < 0.001) |
Su et al. [33] | Prospective observational | 44 | eGFR (MDRD) |
| Stable or improved (P < 0.001) |
Handa et al. [34] | Retrospective observational | 196 | sCr |
| Decreased (P < 0.001) |
Hegarty and Desai[35] | Retrospective observational | 20 |
| NR |
|
Bilen et al. [36] | Retrospective observational | 185 | eGFR (MDRD) |
| Improved (P = 0.02) |
Nouralizadeh et al. [37] | Retrospective observational | 94 | eCrCl (Cockroft–Gault) |
|
|
Bucuras et al. [38] | Retrospective observational | 189 | sCr |
| Stable |
El-Tabey et al. [39] | Retrospective observational | 200 | eCrCl (Cockroft–Gault) | NR | Improved (P < 0.001) |
References . | Type of study . | Patients, n . | Method of assessment . | Time points of assessment . | Renal function . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ünsal et al. [27] | RCT (three different dilatation techniques of percutaneous track) | 50 |
|
| No difference between groups and with baseline |
Moosanejad et al. [28] | RCT (postop ureteral stenting or not) | 84 | sCr |
| No difference between groups |
Chatham et al. [29] | Prospective observational | 19 |
|
| Stable or improved |
Moskovitz et al. [30] | Prospective observational | 87 | Tc-99 QDMSAa |
| Stable |
Kiliç et al. [31] | Prospective observational | 24 | CDUS |
| Stable |
Bayrak et al. [32] | Prospective observational | 80 |
|
| Improved (P < 0.001) |
Su et al. [33] | Prospective observational | 44 | eGFR (MDRD) |
| Stable or improved (P < 0.001) |
Handa et al. [34] | Retrospective observational | 196 | sCr |
| Decreased (P < 0.001) |
Hegarty and Desai[35] | Retrospective observational | 20 |
| NR |
|
Bilen et al. [36] | Retrospective observational | 185 | eGFR (MDRD) |
| Improved (P = 0.02) |
Nouralizadeh et al. [37] | Retrospective observational | 94 | eCrCl (Cockroft–Gault) |
|
|
Bucuras et al. [38] | Retrospective observational | 189 | sCr |
| Stable |
El-Tabey et al. [39] | Retrospective observational | 200 | eCrCl (Cockroft–Gault) | NR | Improved (P < 0.001) |
Tc-99 QDMSA was used for assessment of renal defects, differential function and GFR (Gates method).
Tc-99 MAG3 was used for measurement of differential function.
Tc-99 QDMSA, quantitative SPECT of technetium-99 dimercaptosuccinic acid; Tc-99 MAG3, technetium-99m mercaptoacetyltriglycine; CDUS, colour Doppler ultrasonography; eCrCl, estimated creatinine clearance.
References . | Type of study . | Patients, n . | Method of assessment . | Time points of assessment . | Renal function . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ünsal et al. [27] | RCT (three different dilatation techniques of percutaneous track) | 50 |
|
| No difference between groups and with baseline |
Moosanejad et al. [28] | RCT (postop ureteral stenting or not) | 84 | sCr |
| No difference between groups |
Chatham et al. [29] | Prospective observational | 19 |
|
| Stable or improved |
Moskovitz et al. [30] | Prospective observational | 87 | Tc-99 QDMSAa |
| Stable |
Kiliç et al. [31] | Prospective observational | 24 | CDUS |
| Stable |
Bayrak et al. [32] | Prospective observational | 80 |
|
| Improved (P < 0.001) |
Su et al. [33] | Prospective observational | 44 | eGFR (MDRD) |
| Stable or improved (P < 0.001) |
Handa et al. [34] | Retrospective observational | 196 | sCr |
| Decreased (P < 0.001) |
Hegarty and Desai[35] | Retrospective observational | 20 |
| NR |
|
Bilen et al. [36] | Retrospective observational | 185 | eGFR (MDRD) |
| Improved (P = 0.02) |
Nouralizadeh et al. [37] | Retrospective observational | 94 | eCrCl (Cockroft–Gault) |
|
|
Bucuras et al. [38] | Retrospective observational | 189 | sCr |
| Stable |
El-Tabey et al. [39] | Retrospective observational | 200 | eCrCl (Cockroft–Gault) | NR | Improved (P < 0.001) |
References . | Type of study . | Patients, n . | Method of assessment . | Time points of assessment . | Renal function . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ünsal et al. [27] | RCT (three different dilatation techniques of percutaneous track) | 50 |
|
| No difference between groups and with baseline |
Moosanejad et al. [28] | RCT (postop ureteral stenting or not) | 84 | sCr |
| No difference between groups |
Chatham et al. [29] | Prospective observational | 19 |
|
| Stable or improved |
Moskovitz et al. [30] | Prospective observational | 87 | Tc-99 QDMSAa |
| Stable |
Kiliç et al. [31] | Prospective observational | 24 | CDUS |
| Stable |
Bayrak et al. [32] | Prospective observational | 80 |
|
| Improved (P < 0.001) |
Su et al. [33] | Prospective observational | 44 | eGFR (MDRD) |
| Stable or improved (P < 0.001) |
Handa et al. [34] | Retrospective observational | 196 | sCr |
| Decreased (P < 0.001) |
Hegarty and Desai[35] | Retrospective observational | 20 |
| NR |
|
Bilen et al. [36] | Retrospective observational | 185 | eGFR (MDRD) |
| Improved (P = 0.02) |
Nouralizadeh et al. [37] | Retrospective observational | 94 | eCrCl (Cockroft–Gault) |
|
|
Bucuras et al. [38] | Retrospective observational | 189 | sCr |
| Stable |
El-Tabey et al. [39] | Retrospective observational | 200 | eCrCl (Cockroft–Gault) | NR | Improved (P < 0.001) |
Tc-99 QDMSA was used for assessment of renal defects, differential function and GFR (Gates method).
Tc-99 MAG3 was used for measurement of differential function.
Tc-99 QDMSA, quantitative SPECT of technetium-99 dimercaptosuccinic acid; Tc-99 MAG3, technetium-99m mercaptoacetyltriglycine; CDUS, colour Doppler ultrasonography; eCrCl, estimated creatinine clearance.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.