日本小児泌尿器科学会 Japanese Society of Pediatric Urology# $ * +, -. /01234 5672! " # $ 58 9: ;? 562 5@ AB C@DE123414F GHI24JK LM NO PQRST>? 5672UVWXYZO1234

CONTENTS

!"#$%&'()'*+,-./0123456789 2016 ::::::::::

!";<+,=>)VUR456789 2016 ::::::::::::::::::::

1- 7647- 122

Japanese Society of Pediatric Urology

!"#$%&'()*+, Vol.25 No.2 2016

!"#$%&'()'*+,-./0123456789 2016

: ;

<=>? @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 4 - 79ABCDEFGHI @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 5 - 80JK#$%&'(LMNO(P%&'(Q56RSTUVW @@@@@@@@@@@ 6 - 821K#$%&'(Q56RSTUVW2KO(P%&'()UPJO4Q56RSTUVW3KXYZ[\]1^_4K`6abQc>Qde5K]1^_LMN7fghQij

kKblmnompq @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 10 - 851K#$%&'(Qbl\rs2KUPJOQpstputpq14psa4vs%0123b4ws%012324pqmpuxyz0123?M{|=}xya4')~��t+�,4?|=}23b4+,)��4?|=}23

3KUPJO�wQpq14��'�(24+,��-./0123)UVJO4347f��?M}&'(44��+,��)VUR454��'*+,t+,��t��%+,�64�]s%��t�/+��74��'

K¡¢ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ 14 - 891K£¤|"QUPJOQ¥¦2K¤|§5j&'(QUPJOQ¥¦3K¤|§5j&'(QUPJO�wQ¨©4KUPJOQª«¬5KUPJOQ®¬6KUPJOQ¯°¨©14©±'?|=}+²³á4VURb4UVJOc4��'*+,d4µ/+,¶·e4��'f4¸¹'

24º±'?|=}+²³´7K»¼v½|8K¯°¾}(P¿9K!"À%'Áp?Â}#$%'+²³´¨©QUPJOQÃ¯

!"#$%&'()'*+,-./0123456789 2016Ä: ;

176

!"#$ %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% 18 - 931"&#1'()*2'+,*3'-./01234'a'5-67b'-674'89.:2"-.;<=>#$1'<=?@2'-.a'ABCDECDFGHIJKL-./MN>OP-'b'AQRSc'9TUV-d'W9e'XWY

3"011'092'WZ013'9[K=014'9\] _àba4"cd#$1'efg012'hi=01a'j9klmnopb'DMSAPqrsmnop3'CT4'MRI5'VCUG6'IVP7'RP8'Pressure Flow study

t"uv %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% 25 - 1001"wx>uvyz{>|}~I��7��1'��7OP-��z{>|}~/CAP'I��7a'CAP2��b'CAP2��2'9TUV-I��3'��7OP-��CAPI�.2"�x>uv1'��>P��C9�� r¡/¢£¤Jb a ¤'¥¦2'§¨©�a'ª§Q«b'�¬c'®P¯Iª°d'±²³�±²´µe'¶Q9T·k¸a¹f'9º¥¦b a ¤

3'w»¼©�a'w»¼½P¯ª§�¾]¤ar¿À�b'AÁ¼½P¯ÂÃ�/AÁCÄAÅ'c'ÆÇÈ¡ÉÊP¯ÂÃ�

4'UPJO�PËÌÍVURÎÏÐÑÒÓ²Iuv

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

277

a!"#$b!VUR

%&'()*+,- ............................ 39 - 1141&/012'(,-1!3"42'(567892!:;"<6=0>2?;"@A2893!3"42BCDEC4!FGHIJKL5!0>2MNOPQRSa!TLb!UVWTXc!YZ[TX

2&\/012'()*+,-1!\/012'()*+,-2!\/012grade]^?"]2)*+,-a!:;^_`3"4aSFU grade 1^grade 2!b!:;^bc`3"4aSFU grade 2^grade 3!c!:;^F`3"4aSFU grade 3^grade 4!d!d;3"43!efghijkl3"4^\/012)*+,-4!\/012MNOP(m

n+op ................................. 45 - 120qr as! ............................... 46 - 121

tu vwxyzL{|[} [0~�}

xy��D3"4a"<L,��*��!h�/�p 2016��

378

!"#$

%!&'()!*+"#,-./$%01234561980&/78.'9(:;.)<=*>$?@A+BCDE+B$)

FGH4'()6IJK4+)L&.'()5MNOP#4?Q$RSTU,-6,.V/RW.)X$?@)FGHYIT)L&

'()$Z[4\01]!6^_6à\05bcGH4Ud7d6+)L&'()$edY!6fHg2.hi2.3j7

86k.MN5à.ZlmR8n6opdYINfm5q8H4?Q$!RSTr..6kH2!Isg2tuvwO[Hx?I.

76tuvw!'9(yz{|2?I.76kdYhi\4dRI%!&'()$sIY!}516OW.?Q$~�x?I76

7{$8gSTr.5RI.5�X234Uk.T#69��.��78%!&'().:0.`��mR4?QRr.O�dY�d

ImIQ:;OTNG��|TUDdIqFO<g�6*+"#,-.:0$�J4��$=>s:0`��.��O?@$62013

&$A�.B9*+"#,-��5�C23ST�D��%E.E�$?@��O>��4fm5�8dTUF��G

�6��mdY��CO�#9H�� ¡¢$£¤¥78¦�GH6§ mdY©H.5�� ¡¢$£¤¥5GIGHTU9ª

.«¬?O'().:0.®¯°±²68³=JK=L´6µ�6:;6\06CBtum}5mdY6kH¶H.��$·

@J|TU

��16!6¸¹AO��$ºMd6PubMedRW2»¢¼¢½78NOOb8£6k.P2¾:m¿JH4r.OÀQdY

OÁÂdTUkdY2015&.Ã24ÄB9*+"#,-��Å�269ª.:ÆOÇ ÈÉÊ².ËÌ2ÍÎd6ÏÐ°ÑÒÓ� Ô

ORTUG8$ÏÐ°ÑÒÓ� Ô$Z[4¹A��.ÄSO<g�T�26��6§¨6F��G�.Õ�2Ö×O~I6

ØÙ.¬?$sIYÚÛ=¨�£6Õ��.ÖÜ.rm$9OªO��dTUkdYB9*+"#,-��5��.ÝÞOtY

ß*+%!&'()�(T#}à~.Uuáâ¥:0`�� 2016ãmdY��äåæ.çèmRSTU

éV W�

!"#$

9ª!X8.êëCìY=íam.Zâeî!RIU9ª��$:dT[Q![ïYB9*+"#,-��78ðñGHTr

.23@6k.ò.êëCóôRW78.ðõ!�|Yö8n6÷ør�|YIRIU¸��Øùmóôúm.Zûü\rýþdR

IU

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

479

!"#$%&'()

# $ * +, -. /01234 5672

! " # $ 58 9: ;<=>? 562

5@ AB C@DE123414F GHI24JK

LM NO PQRST>? 5672UVWXYZO1234 GHI2[

\] ^_ à1234 GHI2

bc de fgDEhij>? GHI2

kl mn opDqrstuvwxyx%z{>? GHI2

,| } ~a3414F GHI24JK

�� ]� �z�3434?14��2 �GHI724�,

u � # $ �0 �. n�%3v>? GHI2

�8 �: ��%�x>? GHI2

~� �� C@DE123414F GHI24JK

�� n� ��D�r%��>? 562

� "� u1234¡¢>? GHI2

X£ ¤¥ ~a3414F GHI24JK

{¦ §¨ ~a3414F GHI24JK

©ª �« ��¬E3434?14��2 �GHI24�,

®¯ °± ²³DEhij>? 5672

PQRST>?U%´µ¶·[

¸ ¹ ºF »: XYZO1234 �¼562

½ ¾¿À ��¬E3434?14��2 �GHI24�,

UÁÂÃÄ[

ÅÆÇÈÉ ÊM Ë. ÌÍ3434? 5672

56ÎÏÐÑ�ÒU�ÓHÔÕÖF×ØÙÚ[ÛÜÝÞß 2016à!"#$%&'()

580

!1 "#$%&'()*+,-./0

!2 1'2$%&'()*+,-./03ureteropelvic junction obstruction : UPJO4

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

681

1!"#$%&'()*+,-./01213!"!#$%&'(")*+,-./0'12)34%#$567%&89:)3,"!#$%&;ureteropelvic junc-tion obstruction : UPJO<=/0>?@''2=ABCDEFGH,IJKL)UPJO'-./&M#A*>N@O(P)Q7R>,Q/*&M#'-.D$%&'+,S%T-/$UVWXYZ[Q\.K>]8^_ 3abcP)'/dQ0GL>,I

2!4'5$%&'1UPJO3()*+,-./01223!*&M#D/efg*,hDijfgkL12fg)lm/3n4\oApqk,r=QshI0't)3n4\oup)3,grade56Qvg7w=Z,IJSFU56grade 1!2A*>N/8g()3n4\oA]8^_x7yIzgrade 3'-./%#{|};anteroposterior pelvic di-ameter : APD<x~�=�/3n4\o'�A']8^_=Z,-.=9$V��Q:;)Z,-.)5k>,I�grade 4'-./KL)9$V��)3,7wx7yI�9$V��A5%T-;differential renal function :DRF<=$UVWXYx7w�,Q/bc<CDDRF�40�/$UVWXY=>/DRF?�@�5!10�x�.()AB�G��,I�grade 4'�,$%&Q3C?��+-./�m��Qg�A��bcP)QD�>,IUPJO'�m]8DE�)3H5kFG L�/r'+�*&M#$%&'�"/d'�8/�ZR�bck]8^_k'AB/*,hDbcx7y-.' ¡¢£�Z[)qhG¤8'¥dDZhIr>D/F¦§Q1fg)�m��`3a�m�G�,r=QH¨K>Gh,�)/$%&'grade/%T-Z[x�I�+randomized control study;RCT<Q©=ª[ZK>GhZhr=)«2�,Ir'+�/UPJO)3,*&M#$%&'¬4hDE�)®J=�Gh,I�k�/|/¯(°±S²³KoDZK>G 4/r>Lx =)*&M#$%&']8^_ 3abc<C'AB)qhGµ¶�,I

3!6789:;<=>SFU561<)3,grade 1!2'$%&Dj|1C?L'�

m��@Q�h2,3<Igrade 3!4'$%&)`hG´$%&'·¸�+D�m��QH¨4<K>Gh,r=kL/F¦§AD�m�G¹��'º-#x»5�I�G�"/dQ\.K>,r==Z,I�k�ZQL/�m��xg��G']8^_g¼M)%T-'?�Q½7�, ' *,5<Ir'r=kL/3n4\oZLa)9$V��'¾¿(/8g(7w' =A]8^_QZK>,r==Z,Ir']8^_M'7wÀÁYÂXÃD/$%&'+, 3a%T-)34¾¿K>,Q/\o'Ä7 ¡¢£�)qhGD��F+ 'DZhI�k�/]8^_g¼M'Å(NOSÆ\o'¼ÇQPHZF+-.AD/bcP)|'%T-ÈQQD�

ZhÉÊ=Z,º-# *4/Ë"Ì'RZ]8^_M'5SQ:;=Z,6<I

4!?*@A(BC(DE�"/d'�8)D/3n4\o)3,$%&'+,=

99mTc-MAG3;technetium- 99mmercapto -acetyl-3-triglycine<*,hD99mTc-DTPA;technetium- 99m diethylenetiaminepentaacetid acid<)3,9$V��A'5%T-/$UVWXYÉÍQ7wK>,Ir>L'\oÎÏx�.()AB�G�"/d'�8QZK>,I

5!;<=>FGHIJKL(MN3n4\oDF¦§':Ð\oA*4/efgkL'Ñ6xÒTA�,Ief3n4\oApqkF+MU,�A'$%&'80�+,D�m��,r=QVL>G 47</]8^_ÓÔ'WXÕ=hÖ,I$%&'+,QSFU56grade 1!2A*>N/8g(Z3n4\oA]8^_x7yI$%&'+,=0'%T-9:D×Y�Gh,r=QVL>G 48</SFU56)3,$%&'+,/*,hDAPD9<Q�"/d�8)`hG~�)K>,I12fA'�m��=bcP)&ZA'\.AD/[ØAPD'ÙD0>Ú>9.4mm=29mm=bcP)&ZAAPDQ\Û)Ü�h10<IAPD�12mmAD%9:'ÝÀÞD?H/APD�20!30mm*,hDSFU56 grade 3?�AbcP)Qßà�,H¨QsH8,11,12</APD�40mm!50mmADearly pyeloplastyQ7R>,r= shI3n4\o'ÎÏ'�Abc<CQ��L>Gh,H¨ *,Q/sHQ9$V��'\oÎÏ=.RáGABK>Gh,I�k�/APD�20mm'-.D/DRFDâã]ä)*413</9$V��\ox7R�3n4\o'�A']8^_ º-A*,I3n4\o=ZLa9$V��D�"/d�8)`h

Gå;ZT-\oA*4/â�h{æ^' =AâÒZ7wQZK>ZÕ>NZLZh14,15<I9$V��AD5%T- 3a$UVWXY'ÉÍQ7wK>,IZkA /5%T-D�"/d�8'�Aç´å;Z '=èR>,ISFU56'grade 3!4'MU,?�'$%&/DRF�40�'&ZQ%T-?�S$%&ßé=hF+bcP)'êë2ì16<A*,r=kL/$%&'ßé*,hD]8^_M'5%T-?�Qbc<C'íî'¤q=K>Gh,17,18<IKL)/$UVWXY'ÉÍ´�"/d�8'~�¥_=Z,I9$V��A'T 1/2Q$àï'7w)D<K�19</bc<C'¥_)DZLZh='H¨20< *,¤//å,$%&'ð�=ñ×�G 4bc<C'¥_=�G\b='H¨16< �L>,Ir'r=kL/9$V��A'aïò X£DóB(Zbc<CADZhQ�I�ô�¥_=èR>/European Association of Urology;EAU<'2015õ¡U�¡£A´5%T-?�== )bc<C'¥_=�Gh,I;http://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/EAU-Guidelines-Paediatric-Urology-2015.pdf<\oÀÁYÂXÃ=0'ÎÏ'¬4h)qhGD/��vg7wA3n4\ox7h/SFU56grade 3!4'-.D

ö÷"!#$%& 3a*&M#$%&'("øÃùÝúû

üf"!#$%&;%#$567%&89:<("bý� 2016þö÷"!#$%& 3a*&M#$%&'("øÃùÝúû

782

!"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789DRF:40;9"<#=>?@A9DRFBCDE5!10;.FGHIJKLMNOP23QRSMT)4567.UV12WX8YZ[WX\] 9_àbIcdRIMTIe2+,-/0b9fgh[iPj45klmearly pyeloplastynhopOP9+,-qrIst1221n3DRF:10;S+,-uvhwdSxG)\+yz{|e}+~��5S��H��Ie2+,-Sfg\��OP��222,23n3��S4567��.��O[iPj9V�H[��MT|e}!"#$%&'()Sc/0.��3��I�+�S��2�8*+,-BCh� ¡PPj45��mdelayed pyeloplastynh¢ ¡P224n3£�9wd�+�h¤�¥¦L�xG)8+,-S§b8� 9SFU*¨)grade 4Swd�+�h3©ª�¥¦L�xG9«¬®8�¯)°±45��h²£P28n3��L�MTX³S´µ?¶>·Ie early pyeloplasty9q¹H��9��º¡45»�mdelayedpyeloplastynS¼½h¾¿ÀOP23WPIe 9«¬®�Á)8+,-Â¹S\X@�[45hÃi¡P9�ÄdS+,-uv84 5Ie¸R Å\Æ Ç£P225,26n3£�9delayedpyeloplasty8BCL�+,-.BCÈSÉÊIRÅOË�2WX\Ì¡P�| 945SÍÎÏÐ%.ÑL�8[¡[�3

hydronephrosis, UPJO,management, guideline, pyeloplasty,indicationSÒ>Ó><)PubMedMÔL�287Õº¡96Öº×Ø�XÙÚP226ÕSÛÜ.ÝÞL�3

mßà �n

! "1) Fernbach, S. K., Maizels, M., Conway, J. J. : Ultrasoundgrading of hydronephrosis : introduction to the sys-tem used by the Society for Fetal Urology. Pediatr.Radiol., 23, 478-480, 1993.

2) Madden-Fuentes, R. J., McNamara, E. R., Nseyo, U., etal : Resolution rate of isolated low-grade hydronephro-sis diagnosed within the first year of life. J. Pediatr.Urol., 10, 639-644, 2014.

3) Koff, S. A. : Postnatal management of antenatal hy-dronephrosis using an observational approach. Urol-ogy, 55, 609-611, 2000.

4) Ulman, I., Jayanti, V. R., Koff, S. A. : The long-term fol-low up newborns with severe unilateral hydronephro-sis initially treated nonoperatively. J. Urol., 164, 1101-1105, 2000.

5) Davenport, M. T., Merguerian, P. A., Koyle, M. : Ante-natally diagnosed hydronephrosis : current postnatalmanagement. Pediatr. Surg. Int., 29, 2017-214, 2013.

6) Eskild-Jensen, A., Munch Jørgensen, T., Olsen, L. H., etal : Renal function may not be restored when usingdecreasing differential function as the criterion forsurgery in unilateral hydronephrosis. B. J. U. Int., 92,779-782, 2003.

7) Alconcher, L. F., Tombesi, M. M. : Natural history ofbilateral mild isolated antenatal hydronephrosis con-

servatively managed. Pediatr. Nephrol., 27, 1119-1123,2012.

8) Onen, A. : An alternative grading system to refine thecriteria for severity of hydronephrosis and optimaltreatment guideline in neonates with primary UPJ-type hydronephrosis. J. Pediatr. Urol., 3, 200-205, 2007.

9) Dhillon, H. K. : Prenatally diagnosed hydronephrosis :the Great Ormond Street experience. Brit. J. Urol., 81,39-44, 1998.

10) Longpre, M., Nguan, A., MacNeily, A. E., et al : Predic-tion of the outcome of antenatally diagnosed hy-dronephrosis : A multivariable analysis. J. Pediatr.Urol., 8, 135-139, 2012.

11) Joseph, V. T. : The management of renal condition inthe perinatal period. Early Hum. Dev., 82, 313-324,2006.

12) St. Aubin, M., Willihnganz-Lawson, K., Varda, B. K., etal : Society for Fetal Urology Recommendations forpostnatal evaluation of prenatal hydronephrosisáwillfewer voiding cystourethrograms lead to more uri-nary tract infection? J. Urol., 190, 1456-1461, 2013.

13) Burgu, B., Aydogdu, O., Soygur, T., et al : When is itnecessary to perform nuclear renogram in patientswith a unilateral neonatal hydronephrosis? World J.Urol., 30, 347-352, 2012.

14) Shimada, K., Kakizaki, H., Kubota, M., et al : Standardmethod for diagonosis dilation of the renal pelvis andureter discovered in the fetus, neonate or infant. Int. J.Urol., 11, 129-132, 2004.

15) Gordon, I., Piepsz, A., Sixt, R. : Guieline for standardand diuretic renogram in children. Eur. J. Nucl. Med.Mol. Imaging, 38, 1175-1188, 2011.

16) Karnak, I., Woo, L. L., Shah, S. N., et al : Results of apractical protocol for management of prenatally de-tected hydronephrosis due to ureteropelvic junctionobstruction. Pediatr. Surg. Int., 25, 61-67, 2009.

17) Chertin, B., Pollack, A., Koulikov, D., et al : Conserva-tive treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstructionin children with antenatal diagnosis of hydronephro-sis : lesssons learned after 16 years of follow-up. Eur.Urol., 49, 734-739, 2006.

18) Belarmino, J. M., Kogan, B. A. : Management of neona-tal hydronephrosis. Early Hum. Dev., 82, 9-14, 2006.

19) Amarante, J., Anderson, P. J., Gordon, I. : Impaireddrainage on diuretic renography using half-time orpelvic excretion efficiency is not a sign of obstructionin children with a prenatal diagnosis of unilateral re-nal pelvic dilatation. J. Urol., 169, 1828-1831, 2003.

20) Heinlen, J. E., Manatt, C. S., Bright, B. C., et al : Opera-tive versus nonoperative management of ureteropel-vic junction obstruction in children. Urol., 73, 521-525,2009.

21) Kaseelas, C., Papouis, G., Grigoriadis, G., et al : Patternof renal function deterioration as a predictive factor of

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

883

unilateral ureteropelvic junction obstruction treat-ment. Eur. Urol., 51, 551-555, 2007.

22) Aziz, M. A., Hossain, A. Z., Banu, T., et al : In hy-dronephrosis less than 10% kidney function is not anindication for nephrectomy in children. Eur. J. Pediatr.Surg., 12, 304-307, 2002.

23) Wagner, M., Mayr. J., Häcker, F. M. : Improvement ofrenal split function in hydronephrosis with less than10% function. Eur. J. Pediatr. Surg., 18, 156-159, 2008.

24) Eskild-Jensen, A., Gordon, I., Piepsz. A., et al : Congeni-tal unilateral hydronephrosis : a review of the impactof diuretic renography on clinical treatment. J. Urol.,173, 1471-1476, 2005.

25) Chertin, B., Rolle, U., Farkas, A., et al : Does delayingpyeloplasty affect renal function in children with aprenatal diagnosis of pelvic-ureteric junction obstruc-tion. B. J. U. Int., 90, 72-75, 2002.

26) Ylinen, E., Ala-Houhala, M., Wikström, S. : Outcome ofpatients with antenatally detected pelviureteric junc-tion obstruction. Pediatr. Nephrol., 19, 880-887, 2004.

!"#$%&'()'*+,-./0123456789 2016:;<#$%&'(=>?@(A%&'(B56CDEFGH

984

1!"#$%&'()*+,-!"#$%&'()%!*%+,-./0123/"4!"56789:;<1=>?@ABC(#DEFG)UPJO4HIJK4LM)$%/0N&Ovesicoureteral re-flux : VURP)/0$%QRSTUVWOureterovesicaljunction obstruction : UVJOP'XMOYP?UPJO'UVJO()Z'5[\S]EA[\^_`6-abcde;<EFe1P?UPJOABC(fCg4h(9bie:j)klEFed'4fi?$%&(_ÀmKE#Dn;<1o9)pq_ÈF

rs%1tuvw)%xy(z{9bf|%'ne?kpqI9M(S}_ÈFrs$%&'nG)%xy(~��LKVW�E1o>e?S}_ÈI�R#6%xy4��>e��4FG)��1)>e?'�6��5��4�)6ne4)��>e&*IFe?@A:j);<1~�6��9)��^��15�6R�d'4�)EFe?

2!UPJO(.-/.0/.11P;C Z¡¢£vr:¤&¥#UPJO(¦C#TUVW6-e

IA4HIfM)L]§¨^©ª«06-eIA(¬ni1P?

®)¯°±A&¥#UPJOE(©ª«04BCEFed'4fi2-5P?_ÀBC4)¦C#I9M(�C#EFabI)%!784�3'L]§¨^/0²³´µ�n¶A·¸5n_`x¹1�º>e1P?L]§Ä»¼(klE)¦C#'�C#½®A)C6ne'A�¾IFe1,6P?aP¦C#TUVW¦¿4[Mne;<E¦C#_`1=9)À'5�Áx

y5nÂÃ1Ä>e?~�SA/06ÅÆb[i'i�Ç£4fM)¦C#_À~�nÈÉ(ni?ÊËÌÍ4ÎÏ6na:IA7P)Ð�n+ÑÒÑ)Ó±#/0,AÔÕ8P)/0´µÖ×#ØÙÚÛn¶#DnBC4ÜÝ�rbie?/0´µÖ×#ØÙÚÛAJK()0.5!5Þ5,9P'ßàvrbie4)&¥#UPJOA��()5Þ'JK4Li3P?¦C#TUVWAJK()18!100Þ1-3P'á4FG)&¥#UPJOE(¦C#TUVWAJK(18Þ'¬ni3P?¦¿([i4À'56âã9bied'4fi?�:)/0ä(åM)/0äAæç#(~�S]6ÅÆè¬9bie?UPJS6(éêëEìÑ#AniS}4FeAEUPJ1íÝbA/0A+ÑÒÑAîï4ðWvrbie?bP�C#TUVWñ©ª«0ò©ª>e%óô«0^#õ«06-ab/04'�Ý�rb)~�n/&1ö÷bie?%óô1ø->

ùúÈÉ*}.*;<

2 3

%!/0QRSTUVWOureteropelvic junction obstruction : UPJOPABC()fCg4h(9b,G)¦C#TUVWO/0[\)/0ØÙÚÛP'�C#TUVWO©ª«0P4BCEFed'4fi?_`4��9%!478>e')L]§¨^´µ#û¨*ün¶A·¸5_`x¹1�º>e?L]§¨4)BC�ýþ'9bneA�(klEFe?¤&¥#$%&()¦C#_`4fM©ª«0n¶A�C#_`(¬ni?¯°±A&¥#$%&(©ª«06-ed'4fi?

4 "#$%&'(,-

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

1085

!"#$%&'(!)*+,-./"#011!5811-3,10-142,/$3%7.4!38145&67)!8'9:;7)!152<(=>?$0@)6A&BC*+D,4-EF!&/06G3HI?./?0J;K$%&123JB0LF!<$&-EF!?6K&M7/H.N)$%JB$44OP!HI?A./Q53$%06RF!<"#$%378?S670/6R6AJMK$QT45&F!$%?HM7/UV9%&WXYZE6/[6\PB;K8F!Stephen3:&;<,-!122<$=8$2>33V?S]0/$=0@A/$%3C ?V?6/BJBC ?_JM7/>3`23`$=3a?Cb,)!<"#$%3cDEd867/$=3BFeUPJ51.5cmf,232>3e6512/UPJ3BG4gH!$QT45&F!23e6.812/$=3CFeUPJ51.5cmf,23$%e27128'9:;7)!162<hNVIJiUPJ53jK0LMN?AM7)!&/UPJO&-!Ok?0$=?9&Pl./$=&mQF!8$R54DS?@)6UPJ50-TnHoUF?p267NVIJ3NV8A!<q3rs/UPJ50flap valve3NV8A./WtXu&vw!12<NVIJ0/Y$Z3*+&)x;,-M7(/[#&yzA!8q3rs867vw!\{]A(33|^_&-!<,+_`}3$=,~0�aA3?b�/NVIJ40��8F!�+_`}3$=,~0-!cd4e�!8fg�h_?-iF!jk&-!172<NVIJ3"#05�1118'9:;7n.1-32Z�_UPJO3Ok0518'9:;7)!32<�lJ/WXYZE/m�_3niUPJO��7_9o�pZ/�q]$rstC3Zu0/$=89%&m�_3+,vl;7)!w8&-./�?`}3*+8AM7)!<6J6/w;B&`}3w�*+,-!30318xA)12<yz_3(3J\{]A(3J3{|0�},-!<m�_3n0~�=3Z�_UPJO?Hz�B;!12<

22�VY��i@�Xu?H.8�!��a2$e��./9�%2?8�!Xu9o`}?HM7/$3��&Xu:;7��.�&�x6/��.��&��F!<$3��0T�7��?��:;/!z3��+�&$37�3��A�� ,¡¢4��7)!w8&�B;7)!<9o`}0/$3��4��F!£��37¤8w;B3£��,¥�¦:;!��§?¡¢4��7)!182<9o`}0/��[3$��3¨©ª�«�4��6/��¬?B6�!192<:B?/$3®§?¯AAg3��°§e¥±�²³/ µ¶· ¹º³A»2&�8F!<`}_$Xu?jk]AEd0/$m��,-!202<9o`}J¼½³¾ ³¿À�³«³Á&��67$_N$~&8�;Â/$m��&�b,��9&t¤F!21-232<b29%e�ÃÄ��2?8�!XuUPJO3�+F0�A,-!&/ÅÆ39%�ÃÄ��&�x67)!24-262<Ä��®?¥±�²³&��?�J67n.27-302/Än0��z�Ç�./Ä��&Èz�;rk&ÉzAM7)!<q;B?Ê�/Ë±�º³(�x67)!w8JB��_&�Q67)!302< =UPJO,0/Än®3¥±�²³3�Ê/�+,3Ë±�º³3�Ê0F,?¡�B;7)!(33/Äm�0�Ê67)!83'9&-!312<w

;B3�d0/Ä¢g3�x&`}?H!\{]A(3,-!|^_4ÌÍ67)!<lK/£2Î2nHo¤Ï¥Ð4��7)!C-kit¦_CajalÑ��Ò�Ó��&UPJO,0�x67)!322<

3!UPJO"#$%&12Ô1$§Z$ ¨3ÕÖ?HM7vw!9o`}3A)$§3mQ,

-!<$§3�0�Ê67)!&$=3mQ0Az/UPJ5?@�Xu0A)332<

22UVJOUVJ5,3@�Xu4×6/yz_Y$Z3D,0UPJO?{),!z/Ô19%8(ØÂ;!<`}3;©,0ª:;7)!&/UPJO8«�?�V0$Ù^¬ÚJB©Ù^l,��,-!<Û®ÜF!(3(-;Â/�Ý]Þ¯&°±AZu(-!<UPJOßà324!501?²3³9áÝ]¯A&7d:;!34-372<

32âcC�r´µ¶?H!Y$Z$=Ö�cC3ãä�r´&UPJ5?å¶6KOk?�

B;!<

42VURY$Zßà3%14!401?VUR4¡�!&11,38,392/w;B

3VUR3æ8b»0low grade,-59o`}0vw:x/N)ç·,Û®ÜF!<VUR4¸MKUPJO,è1A(300.51?�éA)12<N#VUR,0/9%0��6¹�;7`}&vw./êa:;7UPJ5?è1A¡¢4��!392<N#VURegradeë!ì23T&í#VURegradeî!ï2H.(/«�?vw!è1AUPJO3º»05¼vw.�F)12<

52è�$=9%/9%¯Eðñ/¯E_9%½5.61?UPJO4¡�372/w;B?H!UPJO0-V$?(QV$?(786I!40,412<

62¾�+_¿À/C59ÁÂY$Z4òK6I!<

72ÃÄ$Y$Z4òK6I!<

hydronephrosis4ó�ô�¦867/PubMed,Åõö÷4E)/:B?pyeloplasty, surgery, cancer, adultA»4Æ)KÅõ973ÇJB/ÈHJ\è±8øù;!41Ç4úÉ6K<

e-Ê �û2

' (1) Park, J. M., Bloom, D. A. : The pathophysiology of UPJobstruction. Current concepts. Urol. Clin. North. Am.,25, 161-169, 1998.

2) Salem, Y. H., Majd, M., Rushton, H. G., et al : Outcome

Ë=yz_Y$Ze$=9%pE5@�Xu2ÌÍâúò 2016üýþaûY0ªY�V

1186

analysis of pediatric pyeloplasty as a function of pa-tient age, presentation and differential renal function.J. Urol., 154, 1889-1893, 1995.

3) Cain, M. P., Rink, R. C., Thomas, A. C., et al : Sympto-matic ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children inthe era of prenatal sonography-is there a higher inci-dence of crossing vessels? Urology., 57, 338-341, 2001.

4) Calisti, A., Perrotta, M. L., Oriolo, L., et al : Functionaloutcome after pyeloplasty in children : impact of thecause of obstruction and of the mode of presentation.Eur. Urol., 43, 706-710, 2003.

5) Adey, G. S., Vargas, S. O., Retik, A. B., et al : Fibroepi-thelial polyps causing ureteropelvic junction obstruc-tion in children. J. Urol., 169, 1834-1836, 2003.

6) Zincke, H., Kelalis, P. P., Culp, O. S. : Ureteropelvic ob-struction in children. Surg. Gynecol. Obstet., 139, 873-878, 1974.

7) Maizels, M., Stephens, F. D. : Valves of the ureter as acause of primary obstruction of the ureter : anatomic,embryologic and clinical aspects. J. Urol., 123, 742-747,1980.

8) Leiter, E. : Persistent fetal ureter. J. Urol., 122, 251-254,1979.

9) Williams, P. R., Feggetter, J., Miller, R. A., et al : Thediagnosis and management of benign fibrous uretericpolyps. Br. J. Urol., 52, 253-256, 1980.

10) Ericsson, N. O., Rudhe, U., Livaditis, A. : Hydronephro-sis associated with aberrant renal vessels in infantsand children. Surgery, 50, 687-690, 1961.

11) Williams, D. I., Kenawi, M. M. : The prognosis of pelvi-ureteric obstruction in childhood : a review of 190cases. Eur. Urol., 2, 57-63, 1976.

12) Stephens, F. D. : Ureterovascular hydronephrosis andthe !aberrant" renal vessels. J. Urol., 128, 984-987, 1982.

13) Lowe, F. C., Marshall, F. F. : Ureteropelvic junction ob-struction in adults. Urology., 23, 331-335, 1984.

14) Nixon, H. H. : Hydronephrosis in children ; a clinicalstudy of seventy-eight cases with special reference tothe role of aberrant renal vessels and the results ofconservative operations. Br. J. Surg. , 40, 601-609, 1953.

15) Sampaio, F. J., Favorito, L. A. : Ureteropelvic junctionstenosis : vascular anatomical background for en-dopyelotomy. J. Urol., 150, 1787-1791, 1993.

16) Sampaio, F. J. : Vascular anatomy at the ureteropelvicjunction. Urol. Clin. North. Am., 25, 251-258, 1998.

17) Koff, S. A. : Pathophysiology of ureteropelvic junctionobstruction. Clinical and experimental observations.Urol. Clin. North. Am., 17, 263-272, 1990.

18) Chevalier, R. L. : Growth factors and apoptosis in neo-natal ureteral obstruction. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., 7, 1098-1105, 1996.

19) Chevalier, R. L., Forbes, M. S., Thornhill, B. A. :Ureteral obstruction as a model of renal interstitial fi-brosis and obstructive nephropathy. Kidney Int., 75,

1145-1152, 2009.20) Eddy, A. A. : Molecular insights into renal interstitialfibrosis. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., 7, 2495-2508, 1996.

21) Norwood, V. F., Carey, R. M., Geary, K. M., et al : Neo-natal ureteral obstruction stimulates recruitment ofrenin-secreting renal cortical cells. Kidney Int., 45,1333-1339, 1994.

22) Bajpai, M., Bal, C. S., Tripathi, M., et al : Prenatally di-agnosed unilateral hydronephrosis : prognostic signifi-cance of plasma renin activity. J. Urol., 178, 2580-2584,2007.

23) Taranta-Janusz, K., Wasilewska, A., Debek, W., et al :Urinary angiotensinogen as a novel marker of ob-structive nephropathy in children. Acta. Paediatr.,102, e429-433, 2013.

24) Murnaghan, G. F. : The dynamics of the renal pelvisand ureter with reference to congenital hydronephro-sis. Br. J. Urol., 30, 321-329, 1958.

25) Pope, J. C., Brock, J. W., Adams, M. C., et al : How theybegin and how they end : classic and new theories forthe development and deterioration of congenitalanomalies of the kidney and urinary tract, CAKUT. J.Am. Soc. Nephrol., 10, 2018-2028, 1999.

26) Cussen, L. J. : The morphology of congenital dilatationof the ureter : intrinsic ureteral lesions. Aust. N. Z. J.Surg., 41, 185-194, 1971.

27) Hanna, M. K. : Antenatal hydronephrosis and uretero-pelvic junction obstruction : the case for early inter-vention. Urology., 55, 612-615, 2000.

28) Notley, R. G. : Electron microscopy of the upper ureterand the pelvi-ureteric junction. Br. J. Urol., 40, 37-52,1968.

29) Hanna, M. K., Jeffs, R. D., Sturgess, J. M., et al :Ureteral structure and ultrastructure. Part II. Con-genital ureteropelvic junction obstruction and pri-mary obstructive megaureter. J. Urol., 116, 725-730,1976.

30) Kajbafzadeh, A. M., Payabvash, S., Salmasi, A. H., etal : Smooth muscle cell apoptosis and defective neuraldevelopment in congenital ureteropelvic junction ob-struction. J. Urol., 176, 718-723, 2006.

31) Starr, N. T., Maizels, M., Chou, P., et al : Microanatomyand morphometry of the hydronephrotic !obstructed"renal pelvis in asymptomatic infants. J. Urol., 148(2 Pt2), 519-524, 1992.

32) Solari, V., Piotrowska, A. P., Puri, P. : Altered expres-sion of interstitial cells of Cajal in congenital uretero-pelvic junction obstruction. J. Urol., 170(6 Pt 1), 2420-2422, 2003.

33) Pieretti-Vanmarcke, R., Pieretti, A., Pieretti, R. V. :Megacalycosis : a rare condition. Pediatr. Nephrol., 24,1077-1079, 2009.

34) Uson, A. C., Cox, L. A., Lattimer, J. K. : Hydronephrosisin infants and children. I. Some clinical and pathologi-

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

1287

cal aspects. J. A. M. A., 205, 323-326, 1968.35) Robson, W. J., Rudy, S. M., Johnston, J. H. : Pelviu-reteric obstruction in infancy. J. Pediatr. Surg., 11, 57-61, 1976.

36) Lebowitz, R. L., Griscom, N. T. : Neonatal hydroneph-rosis : 146 cases. Radiol. Clin. North. Am., 15, 49-59,1977.

37) Snyder, H. M., Lebowitz, R. L., Colodny, A. H,, et al :Ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children. Urol.Clin. North. Am., 7, 273-290, 1980.

38) Reddy, P. P., Mandell, J. : Prenatal diagnosis. Thera-peutic implications. Urol. Clin. North. Am., 25, 171-180,1998.

39) Lebowitz, R. L., Blickman, J. G. : The coexistence ofureteropelvic junction obstruction and reflux. A. J. R.Am. J. Roentgenol., 140, 231-238, 1983.

40) Amar, A. D. : Congenital hydronephrosis of lower seg-ment in duplex kidney. Urology, 7, 480-485, 1976.

41) Joseph, D. B., Bauer, S. B., Colodny, A. H., et al : Lowerpole ureteropelvic junction obstruction and incom-plete renal duplication. J. Urol., 141, 896-899, 1989.

!"#$%&'()'*+,-./0123456789 2016:;<=>?@A?BC

1388

1!"#$%&UPJO&'(1,000!2,000!"#$%1!1&'()*+,-

2!#$)*+,-.&UPJO&'(500!"#$%1!2-4&'()*+,-./0"123456789antenatal hydronephrosis : AHN&':*UPJO;<=,>?@35!60A*+,;BCD"EF%GH*+I5!64AJK;+,8-13&-

3!#$)*+,-.&UPJO/0&12AHN':"@LMNOP'UPJOBQRSTUVWXYZ[9ureterovesical junction obstruction : UVJO&B\WQ]^_`LMNOP'VURBGabNcde79multi-cystic dysplastic kidney : MCDK&Bfg7hQRijHkiOP;lm4,15-18&-Nguyenn8&@UPJO;10!30ABVUR;10!40AB UVJO;5!15ABMCDK;2!5AB\WQ]^;1!5A*+IB();opq''BQRrBQRcstuBfg7hQRBQ]LvBprune-belly8wxBabN7OPij;+,J$%p,-Prestonn18&@UPJO;44ABUVJO;21ABVUR;14ABfg7hQR;12AB\WQ]^;9A*+F5JCD$%p,-Thomas19&@./0"yz{,Q|OPJ$%UPJO;35ABVUR;20ABMCDK;15ABUVJO;10AB\WQ]^;9AB

fg7hQR;8AB7}de;3AJCD$%p,9~1&-

4!UPJO&345�/��@2 : 1J��;G�20&B��"@3!4 : 1*��

"Gp1,21,22,23&-e!*@1 : 2J�N;G�i,Jp�CD;+,23,24,25&-

5!UPJO&675UPJO'��@�;G�26&B��q10!40A3,20,26-28&JGp-

6!UPJO&8912UPJOP�'��'Q|�d;yz{,()@50A"q��,JCD34%p,20,29&-

1&P�7"/�,Q|�d9~2&a&VURVURJ'?�;10A0\J�qG�30&BKarnakn31&@��

��

: ;

��N67897hQRUVWXYZ[Bureteropelvic junction obstruction : UPJO&'()@B�./�1,000!2,000!"#$1!*B�� ¡¢*£¤¥¦§ ©345./�':*@500!"#$%1!'>?*+,-UPJO@./0"12345678'ª«':*�qG�35!60A¬<=,-��@�"®p%@��"G�B��"Gp-��¯/'()@10!40A*+,-�'Q|�d'?�;50A'8�"°=n4BSTQR±²9vesicoureteral reflux : VUR&'?�;10A0\J�qG�B³'�"abN7OP_BSTQRUVWXYZ[Bfg7hQR9´"µ¶7&B·¸7"?��,-

<1 #$)=>?12@*+ABC&D12&E8FTho-mas, D. F.19GHIJKLMNG <2 2O-=$PQ>?RS@T&'(

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

1489

!"#$%&UPJO'()*+,-!143!.11!/7.7012VUR34"567,'#85679:b1UVJOUVJO';4"<=>;?@<A7BCHendrenD321<E$FGH3IJ,130!;.&23!/17.6012KLMN3OP,'#85679:Q,CAhmedD331<RH3IJ,108!;UPJO.1!/0.9012KLMN3OP,'#85679:c1S%E$MNAmarD341<S%MN2UPJOB4"5679&T<435!

.12!/2.801&UJ,'#85679:VWE'XWE&<XWE24"Y9Z'B=>CX[\]^_ abNBcd&U9Z'B=7351:d1.'MNefUPJO;0!1502.'MNef34"Y9'7_#8BU

936,37,381:e1ghEghE;8002iE-34"5CjkE;15l20m;&

T&U9:n;o'pqBUPJO'7r+67931BCs';tu2vwUPJBxy\(W5MNBzW){'A9Z'Bcd'*+679:Pitts'MueckeD391<ghE170!;_|UPJO;4"B27!/15012OPD+,'#85679:f1}~E}~E'UPJO;��2��94"&T<*D^&<A7

B401CG�&<22!37024"Y9';#8BU941,421:��2v9$�&<GuarinoD431B��E99!.2!/2012E$FGH3�+'5,'#85679:��E;5602UPJO3OPCn;&T<}~550Cà220C�'120C��10'#8*+679421:

21�yE2��9M,�F/�31UPJO/�-yUPJO1B10!400'��=>2,20,26,27,281C�F

GE�MCDK/8!1501441CVUR/501301C.yE;/FG/2!501451BZ+2�>:

7!"#$%&01CUPJO<��&UwC��2�76;#8<�A7BCKarnakD311B$�3IJ,143!;UPJO.5!/3.501B��&UwCFinnD461CAtwellD471;��;#8BU9:��&<UPJO;�-Bz7� �BU9'*+679:

8!'()*+,-UPJO<2¡A¢£24"Y9BVACTERL-¤¥

�20,481CCHARGE-¤¥24"Y9Z'B¦D+679491:n;§2¨©ª-£�&<CUPJO3«P,M,�F;4";&TBjk�'¬563W2z7'7_#8�U9501:

9!./012345chronic kidney disease : CKD678*9:12;<=>?@5congenital anomalies of thekidney and urinary tract : CAKUT6AUPJOAB'®0��E¯°±²BIJ,��CKD£³;´µ¶%

2�76CAKUTB·P9¸4<407!.278!/68.301&Cn;_|;60!/21.601B4¹�E-/º'M»5CM»efCiE-CiMNC¼½6¾1&UJ,'#85679511:78&;=¿À¶%��EÁ 9Â;-!;_|260B4¹�M,¢£&UJ,'Ã2;ÄÅ3#85679521:ÆÇÈ2UPJO<.y&U+ÉCzT;iE-3Ê5676�Ë��Ì2ÍÎAEÁ �X3��9Z'<Ï57'ÐÑD+679BC-y�&zTAiE3Ò_�;��yE2E�F34"5679Ó4<CEÁ �X3:ÔÕ>Ö�Â�×B�+'A9:1991!2004Ø;UPJO-!562!.CË��Ì2EÁ �X;,PÙÍÚÛ3+5,;<9!/1.601&UwC_|5!<ÜE2��,UPJO/�yEBMCDK1C1!<-yUPJO&C2!2<4"�FBOPD+,:Q,C1!<zT;iE2v9ÝÞßàC1!<M,áâ;,PCÙÍãäåæç3¿I*+,531:

ureteropelvic juncition obstruction'children3èæéæã2$ê5,792;'Cpelviureteric junction obstruction'children3èæéæã2$ê5,106;'Chydronephrosis'children3èæéæã2$ê5,1,807;Chydronephrosis'anternatal3èæéæã2$ê5,301;^DCëì^�S+'ír+953;3î<5,:

/ïð ñò1

C D1) Woodward, M., Frank, D. : Postnatal management ofantenatal hydronephrosis. B. J. U. Int., 89, 149-156,2002.

2) Koff, S. A., Mutabagani, K. H. : Anomalies of the kid-ney. In Adult and Pediatric Urology, 4th ed., pp2129-2154, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia,2002.

3) Becker, A., Baum, M. : Obstructive uropathy. EarlyE3 FG27&H*;<=>IJAKL

��óô�iE-/E$MNõI'ö÷øù1(=Rîú 2016ûüýþ±

1590

Hum. Dev., 82, 15-22, 2006.4) Thomas, D. F. : Fetal uropathy. Br. J. Urol., 66, 225-231,1990.

5) Thomas, D. F. : Prenatal diagnosis : What do we knowof long-term outcomes? J. Pediatr. Urol., 6, 204-211,2010.

6) Dhillon, H. K. : Prenatally diagnosed hydronephrosis :the Great Ormond Street experience. Br. J. Urol., 81,39-44, 1998.

7) Reddy, P. P., Mandell, J. : Prenatal diagnosis. Thera-peutic implications. Urol. Clin. North. Am., 25, 171-180,1998.

8) Nguyan, H. T., Herndon, C. D., Cooper, C., et al : TheSociety for Fetal Urology consensus statement on theevaluation and management of antenatal hydroneph-rosis. J. Pediatr. Urol., 6, 212-231, 2010.

9) Sairam, S., Al-Habib, A., Sasson, S., et al : Natural his-tory of fetal hydronephrosis diagnosed on mid-trimesterultrasoud. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol., 17, 191-196,2001.

10) Alladi, A., Agarwala, S., Gupta, A. K., et al : Postnataloutcome and natural history of antenatally-detectedhydronephrosis. Pediatr. Surg. Int., 16, 569-572, 2000.

11) Tripp, B. M., Homsy, Y. L. : Neonatal hydronephrosis-the controversy and the management. Pediatr. Neph-rol., 9, 503-509, 1995.

12) Mallik, M., Watson, A. R. : Antenatally detected uri-nary tract abnormalities : more detection but less ac-tion. Pediatr. Nephrol., 23, 897-904, 2008.

13) Harding, L. J., Malone, P. S., Wellesley, D. G. : Antena-tal minimal hydronephrosis : is its follow-up an unnec-essary cause of concern? Prenat. Diagn., 19, 701-705,1999.


15) Blyth, B., Snyder, H. M., Duckett, J. W. : Antenatal di-agnosis and subsequent management of hydronephro-sis. J. Urol., 149, 693-698, 1993.

16) Nguyen, H. T., Benson, C. B., Bromley, B., et al : Multi-disciplinary consensus on the classification of prenataland postnatal urinary tract dilatation (UTD classifica-tion system). J. Pediatr. Urol., 10, 982-998, 2014.

17) Zanetta, V. C., Rosman, B. M., Bromley, B., et al : Vari-ations in management of mild prenatal hydronephro-sis among maternal-fetal medicine obstetricians, andpediatric urologists and radiologist. J. Urol., 188, 1935-1939, 2012.

18) Preston, A., Lebowitz, R. L. : What!s new in pediatricuroradiology. Urol. Radiol., 11, 217-220, 1989.

19) Thomas, D. F. : Prenatally detected uropathy : epide-miological considerations. Br. J. Urol., 81, 8-12, 1998.

20) Carr, M.C., Casale, P. : Anomalies and surgery of theureter in children. In Campbell"Walsh Urology, 10th

ed., pp3212-3235, Elsevier Saunders, Philadelphia,2012.

21) Pates, J. A., Dashe, J. S. : Prenatal diagnosis and man-agement of hydonephrosis. Early Hum. Dev., 82, 3-8,2005.

22) Ocheke, I. E., Antwi, S., Gaijar, P., et al : Pelvi-UretericJunction Obstruction at Red Cross Children!s Hospi-tal, Cape Town : a Six Year Review. Arab. J. Nephrol.Transplant., 7, 33-36, 2014.

23) Capello, S. A., Kogan, B. A., Giorgi, L. J. Jr., et al : Pre-natal ultrasound has led to earlier detection and re-pair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J. Urol., 174,1425-1428, 2005.

24) Van Cangh, P. J. : It is always necessary to treat aureteropelvic junction syndrome? Curr. Urol. Rep., 8,118-121, 2007.

25) Albani, J. M., Desai, M. M., Gill, I. S., et al : Repair ofadult ureteropelvic junction obstruction in solitarykidney : effect on renal fuction. Urology, 68, 718-722,2006.

26) Johnston, J. H., Evans, J. P., Glassberg, K. I., et al : Pel-vic hydronephrosis in children : a review of 219 per-sonal cases. J. Urol., 117, 97-101, 1977.

27) Williams, D. I., Kenawi, M. M. : The prognosis of pelvi-ureteric obstruction in childhood : a review of 190cases. Eur. Urol., 2, 57-63, 1976.

28) Lebowitz, R. L., Griscom, N. T. : Neonatal hydroneph-rosis : 146 cases. Radiol. Clin. North. Am., 15, 49-59,1977.

29) Uson, A. C., Cox, L. A., Lattier, J. K. : Hydronephrosisin infants and children I. Some clinical and pathologi-cal aspects. J. A. M. A., 205, 323-326, 1968.

30) Hubertus, J., Plieninger, S., Martinovic, V., et al : Chil-dren and adolescents with ureteropelvic junction ob-struction : is an additional voiding cystourethrogramnecessary? Result of a multicenter study. World J.Urol., 31, 683-687, 2013.

31) Karnak, I., Woo, L. L., Shah, S. N., et al : Prenatally de-tected ureteropelvic junction obstruction : clinica fea-tures and associated urologic abnomalities. Pediatr.Surg. Int., 24, 395-402, 2008.

32) Hendren, W. H., Padhakrishnan, J., Middleton, A. W.Jr. : Pediatric pyeloplasty. J. Pediatr. Surg., 15, 133-144,1980.

33) Ahmed, S., Savage, J. P. : Surgery of pelviureteric ob-struction in the first year of life. Aust. N. Z. J. Surg., 55,253-261, 1985.

34) Amar, A. D. : Congenital hydronephrosis of lower seg-ment in duplex kidney. Urology, 7, 480-485, 1976.

35) Kolte, S., Choube, S., Charles, N., et al : Pelviuretericjunction obstruction in duplex system. Indian J. Pedi-atr., 69, 717-719, 2002.

36) Hwang, A. H., McAleer, I. M., Shapiro, E. : Congenitalmid ureteral stricutures. J. Urol., 174, 1999-2002, 2005.

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

1691

37)!" #$%&'($)*+,$- :./0123456789./:;<1=.>.?@, 40, 71-74, 1994.

38) Ayyat, F. M., Adams, G. : Congenital midureteral stric-tures. Urology, 26, 170-172, 1985.

39) Pitts, W. R. Jr., Muecke, E. C. : Horseshoe kidneys : a40-year experience. J. Urol., 113, 743-746, 1975.

40) Muller, C. O., Blanc, T., Peycelon, M., et al : Laparo-scopic treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstructionin five pediatric cases of pelvic kidneys. J. Pediatr.Urol., 11, 353. e1-5, 2015.

41) Cinman, N. M., Okeke, Z., Smith, A. D. : Pelvic kidney :associated diseases and treatment. J. Endourol., 21,836-842, 2007.

42) Gleason, P. E., Kelalis, P. P., Husmann, D. A., et al : Hy-dronephrosis in renal ectopia : incidence, etiology andsignificance. J. Urol., 151, 1660-1661, 1994.

43) Guarino, N., Tadini, B., Camardi, P., et al : The inci-dence of associated urological abnormalities in chil-dren with renal ectopia. J. Urol., 172, 1757-1750, 2004.

44) Shaheen, I. S., Watson, A. R., Broderick, N., et al : Mul-ticystic dysplastic kidney and pelviureteric junctionobstruction. Pediatr. Surg. Int., 21, 282-284, 2005.

45) Ahmed, S., Sparnon, A. L., Savage, J. P., et al : Surgeryof pelviureteric obstruction in 101 children over oneyear of age. Aust. N. Z. Surg., 56, 675-680, 1986.

46) Finn, R., Carruthers, J. A. : Genetic aspects of hy-dronephrosis associated with renal agenesis. Br. J.Urol., 46 : 351-356, 1974.

47) Atwell, J. D. : Familial pelviureteric junction hy-dronephrosis and its association with a duplex pelvi-caliceal system and vesicoureteric reflux. A familystudy. Br. J. Urol., 57, 365-369, 1985.

48) Kolon, T. F., Gray, C. L., Sutherland, R. W., et al : Up-per urinary tract manifestations of the VACTERL as-sociation. J. Urol., 163, 1949-1951, 2000.

49) Ragan, D. C., Casale, A. J., Rink, R. C., et al : Genitouri-nary Anomalies in The CHARGE Association. J. Urol.,161, 622-625, 1999.

50) Kupferman, J. C., Druschel, C. M., Kupchik, G. S. : In-creased prrevalence of renal and urinary tract anoma-lies in children with Down syndrome. Pediatrics. 124,615-621, 2009.

51) Ishikura, K., Uemura, O., Iso, S., et al ; Pediatric CKDStudy Group : Japan Committee of Measures for Pedi-atric CKD of the Japanese Society of Pediatric Neph-rology. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., 28, 2345-2355, 2013.

52) Fivush, B. A., Jabs, K., Neu, A. M., et al : Chronic renalinsufficiency in children and adolescents : th 1996 an-nual report of NAPRTCS. North American PediatricRenal Transplant Cooperative Study. Pediatr. Neph-rol., 12, 328-337, 1998.

53) Shimada, K., Matsumoto, F., Kawagoe, M., et al :Urological emergency in neonates with congenital hy-dronephrosis. Int. J. Urol., 14, 388-392, 2007.

ABCDEFGHIGJ./KL9MNOPQRSTUV 2016WXYZ[

1792

1!" #1!"#!$%&'()*+"#,-./0123

2!45!$#$67'89:$%&;'&<(=)*

3!'>?@A()B!a!*'CDEF+8GFHI+JKEL,MNOIPF+HI+Q,RSb!'CDE%-8T%&-8UV.'>?./23!8018W#230X=YZ[2\+'>]^_È%-8T%&-=ab]c82-=&d;efD8g3h%=)*8iIjN=452'>=45]^_`6kl

4!7#>819=7#mS8#noOpq8#rs=)*?tuv=

abcwxyzyu=)*23!

2!$%&'()#*%&'1{=:|}Xc8%&;~<@Ao=��pMjNc8'CD%&'='>NOp%&�>8T%&-�%&-8�'&-(��`_+1!li=��2'>(YZ]0XHIp'?ogq\+o81980@A��8��B�]��p,{;~<@A==�[[�]8,{K]0XHIp%&'o��2!8CD{�FN=%&;~<@A��]��E�'>(��M]%&'o0XHIp��]2\+3,4!l,{K;��K]0XHIp%&'=gkc�FNO�8*'CDN��pi[ogk5!8'>(��'?c� �`_pl+¡�8%-8./23=UV.'>=¢(G�`"#.'>o2_ab]F+oHIp£IDoOp1!+*8%-(¤¥p¦{]c:|}X]JK�p[[�]§¨2©ªF+(«�LMoOpl

1!:|}XE%&=�>=)*8¬-=)*E�'&=N<-=)*EO{$PQ=>8EW¬R

2!'>a!%-8.®8./23=UV.'>?¯°S%&'!=T8%&']�p'>c2_o8±²q=U³N%&'oLÓp_cµV�8�¨2&V=¶W8&X=·Y]��%-23='>(,¸8%-cS9¯�S¹º=¯]

»¼]Ur�pl'>o*k2IP%&'�½¾�pabogk8i=��2>8(¯°S%&'[_�6!lD{¿À=O{]gk8ÁTo¬ZS]g_l"#.'>o2_ab;D{]�_`'>o[\N]�Â-=¢=ab8UV.01[�`ÃÄIF+oHk2pi[oOplU³ÅÆ[�`�Ç2h%8È�_ÉÔp_c_`Êa>8oOË²Ipl¯°S2+*1T&ZIcb+I`_pi[og_7!lb!%&�>;~<@A]�pF+o=��p¿Mc8%&'[F+H

IpC{=Ì'>=Í^8!N8%&�>NX^qp75Îo1Ï¿ÐNO\+o8Ñ=Ò[Ó3oL,M]F+HIp��]2�8%&�>(Ì¤[�`0XHIp'?c� �+lc!#$67'#$67'c%&'(G�pCD{]g_[_ÄI`_

p1!Íc8_`#ÔÕd?vesicoureteral reflux : VUR!oeÖ�`_2�IP 2_[�_ÄIp9!lHubertus²=f×10!Nc18Ïga=&V#ÔØ«&h�ÙÚ?ureteropelvicjunction obstruction : UPJO!266?i44??17Î!o#$67'>N0XHI`_plj+87#J_`#jÛÜ?voiding cystourethrography : VCUG!(«\+178? iVURoeÖ�+=c13??7.3Î!N8#$67o¢²I+=c13?i4??31Î!NO\+lL,MF+HI+SFUkl=grade 3!4=UPJO]��p#$67c30.7!36.6Î=mFN,¸+[=f×11,12!oOpÍc81.8Î=¢[=f×13!�Opl¯°S%&'Nc8#$67=f×c 2_6,7!ld!W#¯°S%&'=nS]W#oL´�7!8ÝM2"#.01(�Þ�p}XNOplj+8¦9:;È�_É^ß]L´�pi[�O�8Ò[Ó3o¶W&=oàS2pqWÔ=rs]�\ , p14!le!áW¬UPJO]áW¬o0'�pmFc5!10Î[_ÄIp15!láW¬oâtHI+%&'=1{]�_`8Ì2ãäuåcáW¬¡�NO\+[=f×15!;%&'=äß]áW¬(v*+[=f×15,16!oO�8%&'=1{]æ�`cW¬R(«_8áW¬=)*(çv�pi[oè*²Ipl2�89w¦{&éx|êN�ëy�`_p¦{=W¬=ìízoOp17!lD{E@|{=ìízo�HI`��8ìízc�î�ï1[�î�ï2]k�²Ipl�î�ï1c95ð�ñ�zyòz(â�8áW¬=Ô:oLMNOpl�î�ï2c99ð�ñ�zyòó5mmHg=zNO�8ô�]W¬(ÐËpLMoOp17!l

õöF+

+ ,

÷}D%&'(F+�p+*]c8~F8øù}X8@#}X(çv�8©ª@A(«�i[oLMNOpl÷}D%&']æ�p©ª@A=ìwc;~<@ANO�8Society for Fetal Urology?SFU!kl(y_pláF='?cúû|@A(ü«�8k&ZI;h�ÙÚ=�F(çv�plCT;MRI23]��é.[=ýþ(�²q]�pi[�)yNOpl

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

1893

3!" #1!"!!"#$%&'()#$*+,-.-/01-21!3%4VUR5&671-890:;8-.<-/0218!=>*)&'(266'?"([email protected]+!"#$5D)E01FG4178'[email protected]&7@)%7.3C)KLMI@10!=N*)!"#$(+O71+P,"Q?RH7@390'L%5.8C+&'(5-ST0@19!=UVWX.E0@&'(430')"(L%41YZL+19C5!"#$?[A7@./\E01-212!=A)] +4&'(_*%VUR)J&('<`S2.4!"#$*()abc5d-.efT02=g!%4hi0&'()1j+Ukl2.-/01F

G7!4m28noLM2=Z@4&'(_*L%>pqrs7-t3u+g!5Ukl2A.<MG4v.wx5y45)67gz)8{089:+]I1V|2.efT01-214!='}~);<?"(l2=0L4!>?�!c��

�Cr!@?A-1>?!?��+B�l2C25M2=!DCrEFG%HI+]I1�82@S4!>?�!Cr@)��J%4HI+]I1�82A.+K�l2=LM>*'�N��T>*)!>?�!Cr@)��J5�E01FG40.5��1Y%0.55g/gCr41Y�2Y%0.4g/gCr42Y�3Y%0.3g/gCr4�713Y��%��.OP+0.15g/gCr��?��.Q.l220!=��T4!"#$rg!4>?!.-I@&'(+R^(�?��+*o74�S+�8 2@S+"!%C28"QLM2=

2!g¡"Q'¢T%4g¡V£�"QLM2g¤c��Cr!

LB�l2=g¤CrJ%¥UG+@'74'¢T+V@'l2=¥UG%¦§�ZL%¨W+@'l254¦§��©%X*L%¥UG5¨W.)@'ª«�Tp01¬s+®l2=�)@S4>*)g¤CrJ)��J%HI.¯Y�¦§��©!L�82A.+K�l2=8F4>*)g¤Cr)��J5LM>*'�N��T�E01-221!=Z@4_°)¥UG5Z7±;8-²J%4g¤CrJL%8±g¤³b ��C?A-1'¢T?B�l221!=

3!!V£�"QUPJO+Ol2!V£�"Q)µ=.71%4N-acetylbeta-D-glucodaminidase�NAG!4β2¶·c ¹¸ºa�4α1¶·c ¹ ºa�5M2=

NAG%'+F-1[+»¼!½z+,± Z04!½z}~)\])¾-¿��T!D+ÀÁl2@S'N^)��*o+;ALMG4&'(+F-1!"#$?[A7@Â+%!DNAG)�Ã?-S2./\E01-222!=

β2¶·c ¹ ºa�4α1¶·c ¹ ºa�%4'ÄÅÆ�_7?`Ç74a95C��5»¼!½z�TÈÉÊË�£?Ì94!D+%Í±/Î�)G7�EFE08-@S4»¼!½z}~L!D)�Ã?-S2=ÏÐ�S)C28UPJOL%!Dβ2¶·c ¹¸ºa�5�Ãl2./\E01-223!=

4!!DÑ·Ò¶ÓÔÓ<(Õ¯&'(+O74]GÖ×)b-"Qc.71!D

)Ñ·Ò¶ÓÔÓ?A-2A.L'¢T)^£rdu)dØ5LÙ8-�.- "(5H/01-2=Úe08<).71transfroming growth factor-beta1�TGF-β1!4epidermalgrowth factor�EGF!4monocyte chemotactic peptide-1�MCP-1!4neutrophil gelatinse-associated lipocalin�NGAL!5M223-26!=UPJO)ÏÐ('L%Ðu+!DÑ·Ò¶ÓÔÓ5��ÛÜZLbÝl2@S;ALM2.)/\5M225!54;j')"(LMG4k¿fL%ghLB�LÙ2Di.%8Gj1-8-=

4!$ % & '1!+P,"QkÖ×0LÞl8+P,"Q5�M"Q.82=+P,"Q+]2&'()mn.7141993H+oßE0@SFU�Society for Fetal Urology!mn27!�à!.SFUmn+�|4'p)^£?áâ7@1999H)ãäå�4#$*�+*oE02'qË'q!zy4)X.��)+P,.æç?A-@'qË'q!zy4)áâ%cè�LM>*r!éê��)mn!28!5A-T02�e!=SFUmn+F92ëì08no5síîÇ.vïðªl229-32!@S4SFUmn5&'(X.)i�Di.E01-2=ñ*�+*oE02&'()Di.714'q)Wuò

�anterior posterior diameter : APD!5A-T02A.5M229,33!=tóô3õ1�)APD15mm��5ö·abc('.E025,34,35!=�)÷+u5+P,"Q)ø]?� 2A.L&'(_*)síîÇ?dØl2Pù8"(5/\E0@32,36-38!=

( SFU)Society for Fetal Urology*+,-./0123grade)45367328.9:;<=<3grade->?@ABC83DEFGHIJKL*

>*úv¯&'(�'q!zûH5`Ç}~!XSÏüÙ 2016�ýþX.

1994

SFU分類

grade 0 腎盂の拡張を認めない

grade 1 腎盂のみ観察される

grade 2 腎盂と数個の腎杯が観察される

grade 3 腎盂の拡張とすべての腎杯の拡張を認める

grade 4 腎盂，腎杯の拡張とともに，腎実質の菲薄化を認める

日本小児泌尿器科学会の分類

grade 0 拡張なし

grade 1 腎盂拡張のみが観察され，腎杯の拡張は見られない

grade 2 腎盂拡張に加え，拡張した腎杯が数個観察される

grade 3 すべての腎杯が拡張

grade 4 grade 3に加え腎杯が凸型に実質内に張り出し，腎実質の菲薄化を認める

2!"#$%&a!!'()*+,-!'()*+,-./012345"0678'#9:;<=$>2?%@%&&AB5C"067D'#9:;<2EFGHIJK=B5$>LMNOP2.HQ"@/"'R8H()S(TUVH!'W=X*+&LYZ[5\D],%AB HSFUDPediatric Nuclear Medicine Council]_ aObWell tempered diuretic renogram protocolc39!dWell tempered protocol!]e-D@5]H-.=Jf2ghiObjklHm/nl2opqr500s00'tuv=wxey=!'()*+,-z{=OP=1y|}~�U�c]��qrGF528!CWell tempered protocolA.HQ"@��DD�2��2�2�3��/L"�X*15"��15ml/kg/hrA30"X*aH�=�8ml/kg/hrA��[5\D2@�GF5C�4�']�4qrGF@Fm/nA.()S(TUV5�='��U��L6�[5\D]�P�r5C�7"�.� ¡A8:qr599mTc-DTPAD¢£'¤tA"9qr599mTc-MAG3]¥:�AB5C!'W.furosemideL�7aH1¦;<A.1.0mg/kgH1¦§Ä.0.5mg/kgL��2�2X*[5\D]©ªDqrGF5C!'WX*=«¬®*.�7"�L�2¯X*[5�2!'WLX*[5+&8°±2X*[5+&H00]�7"�A²<qr5³2X*[5+&]B540-42!C!'()*+,-.0´t2=µK>¶]"?qr5´@·H'¤t¸=¹MLº[67·H002�Aqr5�A·2»"qr5C"067L¼P5½gH67·A=0z¶2345=µK>¶=��B��99mTc-DTPAA.� ¡8:Bdglomerular filtration rate : GFR!H99mTc-MAG3A

.C¾0´D@Edeffective renal plasma flow : ERPF!]¿ZAÀ5C¥:�2GFRHERPF.·Á[5DFhrH\r�=ÂÃ0=Ä��"067]ÅZAÀ543!CÆOH9:;<=¥E=Ç1DaGH'#��7"�]FÈ[5ÆA=±ÉT1/2]ÊË�r5CT1/2=ÅZ&DaG.GÌ@+&]B5]39!H!'W2HÍaO±ÎA=wash out curve=¢ÏÐÑL��aH�=FÈ±ÉLT1/2D[5+&]7F�r5\D]ÒF44-46!Cb!DMSAddimercaptosuccinic acid!0Ó®Ô*+,-dDMSA0Ó®Ô!DMSA.'¤tÕÖ>¶AB H0I¶67Lº[�=

AB5OPH0´D@ED·Á[5C�7"�=0��B=ÂÃ·×J��"067LÅZ[5\D]Ø7AB5C%&{M23FG.!'()*+,-DÙ@ HÚ�=/"��8'��U��6�L%a@FC/01=ÛÜÝÍ.H"067=ÞßLe2àP5DFN

Ká]ÒF47-50!\D��HDMSA0Ó®ÔL7FGâL2"067L$>[5Ká]B551!COãaH"067=Þß]9:;<LMN�=�=Nx.DMSA0Ó®ÔA.OØ7AB HEÆ Òä=KáA!'()*+å2æ5$>]MhrGF5Î47-50!26ç],%AB5C

3!CTCT.èPsßP't8()s'�ÆAéPO'#ê¡

=fëL¥ìQ2º[\D]Ø7AB5CDä2íèLîï5æN@/01Lðñ�2_º[5\D]AÀìòwx=èA?%@RóLôOaGÀO52!C¢õHÛÜ1SAö÷´t=CT@ø=C7@ùU$�úpLVJ[55�A3D-CT]ûüqrGF553!C@3HýêK=Î��+USþ|+U

!2 Society for Fetal Urology"SFU#$%&'()*+,-./01$%

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

2095

!"!#$%MRI&"#'()*+,-54./

4.MRI$012%&34%256(789:;<=#>?1@A'>BMRIB"#1CDEF>,-55-57./G7HGd-DTPA'(%;<#@7MR urography dynamic study>BHIG>CT>)JKLM?7N*(O*PQRH!"!#$>B#S>?1@TUVWPX-UPJO%Y(Z([\+EF&H,]^-\<=#_- '1abcLM@-/MRIB2V.H/01H22d1)J1e(%fghi

j>)J_-O*<k_ '&>?-/G7H,]l34<5mnL-6on+"#1#$>,-/7pqHMRI<brs(t718u6'qMH9:vPw@Mx;>"#1y<<=-78PBH>;<#@7z@{|&}o~1@ '&��nL-/Z(CD#$P?�z@{|P1-��^&��KLM@-78H�21��j��<@7'_-'&HAB�v��HAB�vC��HAB�v,]l��on��KLM@-�MRI#$�({|P�_-�D��AB�v��j��https : //www.jpeds.or.jp./

5.VCUGVCUGBVUR(�E< ;_-78P@7'1-&H¡2APw@MUPJO'VUR&E¢_-FB£¤6!10¥10,58,59.>,-(>H!"!#$>%W¦§<¨_-A'%%&©ªA<GH_-«vP¬_�?>,-'@r)*10,60.&,-®IHUPJO'VUR(�EJKB10!15¥+, 61.H�EA'>B£FP%&©ª<°`_ 'onH¡2A(grade(£@A'>BVCUG<b@HVUR&DKL7±�PB²³><LMNO_�?'@r)*+,-12,18./qoqH2010PQAmerican Urological Association�AUA.'2012PQEuro-pean Association of Urology�EAU.(VUR(´��i��>BHRAµ(VUR<S*_- 'PBT+>,-62,63./RA¶^¡2AP·qVCUG<®UPbr 'X +H£K(%W¦§(O*&,-oH%&©ª<° q7A'P·qMVCUG<br '&¸8nLM@-64./

6.IVP|V^2W9:�intravenous pyelograhy : IVP.B¹º+P»R- '&¼1>,-78Ho½MBRA¶^¡2A(EFX+>bcLM@7&H(%fghij(Y¾¿PZ@HÀÁ>B[Â1N*�+µÃ<\Ä_-±�P¬ÅMbcLM@-65./

7.RPÆb^2W9:�retrograde pyelography : RP.BHIVP

>ÇÈ56(]É%Y(Ê^&;no>1@±�PËEF(78PbcLM@7&HMRI(Ì_PZ@$01%&(4Ã(`S&¼1P1Å778H@7JK&ÍÅ765./qoqH401'(ÎÏA'(NÐPX HRP<Ñbq1@ '&UPJOÒS(abq7��ÓÔ>,-'(<Õ66.%H%WcdÖb]ÇÈ56<�E_-A'&,-'(<Õ1eonHRP<Ï×Pbr�?'()*+ØÙ@67./

8.Pressure Flow study�Whitaker test.Pressure Flow studyB¡2A(ÇÈ56(ÚK<ÛÜ+ÝÞ'qMe_78PbcLM@7&H�v>BßàC�á>2âã'@räå(£@æç<7_-/ÇÈ56(ÚK<ÛÜ+Pe_78P(%fghij&bcL- '&®f+'1Å765,68./

èhydronephrosisG7BUPJOéo½èchildrenG7Bpedi-atricéo½èsymptomG7BexaminationG7BbiomarkerG7BCTG7BMRIG7BretnographyG7BscintigraphyG7BpyelographyG7BcystographyG7Bwhitaker testé(ê�ë��PMPub Med>#ìqHt$q7+(<í@7959gonHhîo½t7'ïcL-ið'AB�v2ñj��g. �v(#%òóôõö<÷øPq768g(ið<ù#q7/

�×Ø ;ú.

! "1) White, J. M. Jr., Kaplan, G. W., Brock, W. A. : Uretero-pelvic junction obstruction in children. Am. Fam. Phy-sician, 29, 211-216, 1984.

2) Reddy, P. P., Mandell, J. : Prenatal Diagnosis. Thera-peutic implications. Urol. Clin. North. Am., 25, 171-180,1998.

3) Miyakita, H., Ueno, S., Nomura, M. : Neonatal hy-dronephrosis detected on routine health check-up. To-kai J. Exp. Clin. Med., 26, 101-105, 2001.

4) Beseghi, U., Chiossi, C., Bonacini, G., et al : Ultrasoundscreening of urinary malformations in "normal# new-borns. Eur. Urol., 30, 108-111, 1996.

5) Coplen, D. E., Austin, P. F., Yan, Y., et al : The magni-tude of fetal renal pelvic dilatation can identify ob-structive postnatal hydronephrosis, and direct postna-tal evaluation and management. J. Urol., 176, 724-727,2006.

6) Alagiri, M., Polepalle, S. K. : Dietl#s crisis : an under-recognized clinical entity in the pediatric population.Int. Braz. J. Urol., 32, 451-453, 2006.

7) Tsai, J. D., Huang, F. Y., Lin, C. C., et al : Intermittenthydronephrosis secondary to ureteropelvic junctionobstruction : clinical and imaging features. Pediatrics,117, 139-146, 2006.

8) Snyder, H. M. 3rd, Lebowitz, R. L., Colodny, A. H., etal : Ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children.Urol. Clin. North. Am., 7, 273-290, 1980.

9) Hashim, H., Woodhouse, C. R. J. : Ureteropelvic Junc-tion obstruction. Eur. Urol., Suppl ; 11, 25-32, 2012.

10) Hubertus, J., Plieninger, S., Martinovic, V., et al : Chil-dren and adolescents with ureteropelvic junction ob-struction : is an additional voiding cystourethrogramnecessary? Results of a multicenter study. World J.Urol., 31, 683-687, 2013.

11) Song, S. H., Lee, S. B., Park, Y. S., et al : Is antibioticprophylaxis necessary in infants with obstructive hy-

�vûk^¡2A�2W%WÖb]ÇÈ56.ElÎù? 2016üýþEF

2196

dronephrosis? J. Urol., 177, 1098-1101, 2007.12) Lee, J. H., Choi, H. S., Kim, J. K., et al : Nonrefluxingneonatal hydronephrosis and the risk of urinary tractinfection. J. Urol., 179, 1524-1528, 2008.

13) Roth, C. C., Hubanks, J. M., Bright, B. C., et al : Occur-rence of urinary tract infection in children with sig-nificant upper urinary tract obstruction. Urology, 73,74-78, 2009.

14) Belman, A. B. : Ureteropelvic obstruction as a causefor intermittent abdominal pain in children. Pediat-rics, 88, 1066-1069, 1991.

15) de Waard, D., Dik, P., Lilien, M. R., et al : Hypertensionis an indication for surgery in children with uretero-pelvic junction obstruction. J. Urol., 179, 1976-1978,2008.

16) Al-Mashhadi, A., Nevéus, T., Stenberg, A., et al : Surgi-cal treatment reduces blood pressure in children withunilateral congenital hydronephrosis. J. Pediatr. Urol.,11, 91. e1-6, 2015.

17)!"#$%&'()* :#$+,-./0123(4,-536$,-7889:;<=+>[email protected], pp90-91,CDEFGH,IJ, 2015.

18) Herz, D., Merquerian, P., McQuiston, L. : Continuousantibiotic prophylaxis reduces the risk of febrile UTIin children with asymptomatic antenatal hudroneph-rosis with either ureteral dilation, high-grade vesi-coureteral refulux, or ureterovesical junvtion obstruc-tion. J. Pediatr. Urol., 10, 650-654, 2014.

19) Huang, H. P., Lai, Y. C., Tsai, I. J., et al : Renal ultra-sonography should be done routinely in children withfirst urinary tract infections. Urology, 71, 439-443,2008.



22) Ali, R. J., Al-Obaidi, F. H., Arif, H. S. : The Role of Uri-nary N-acetyl Beta-D-glucosaminidase in Childrenwith Urological Problems. Oman. Med. J., 29, 285-288,2014.

23) Madsen, M. G., Nørregaard, R., Palmfeldt, J., et al : Uri-nary NGAL, cystatin C, β2-microglobulin, and osteo-pontin significance in hydronephrotic children. Pedi-atr. Nephrol., 27, 2099-106, 2012.

24) Cost, N. G., Noh, P. H., Devarajan, P., et al : UrinaryNGAL levels correlate with differential renal functionin patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction un-dergoing pyeloplasty. J. Urol., 190, 1462-1467, 2013.

25) Madsen, M. G., Nørregaard, R., Palmfeldt, J., et al : Epi-dermal growth factor and monocyte chemotacticpeptide-1 : potential biomarkers of urinary tract ob-struction in children with hydronephrosis. J. Pediatr.

Urol., 9, 838-845, 2013.26) Papachristou, F., Pavlaki, A., Printza, N. : Urinary andserum biomarkers in ureteropelvic junction obstruc-tion : a systematic review. Biomarkers. 19, 531-540,2014.

27) Fernbach, S. K., Maizels, M., Conway, J. J. : Ultrasoundgrading of hydronephrosis : introducetion to the sys-tem used by the Society for Fetal Urology. Pediatr.Radiol., 23, 478-480, 1993.

28)KLMNOPQRSOTLUVOW :XYZ[\$Z7]^_ :%a-bcd+CDefghijklmnDop7qrs?%a5%a-bcd+tup vkw-xyz{|}~��+?@+�f��~2.!#�)�8, 186-189, 1999.

29) Lee, R. S., Cendron, M., Kinnamon, D. D., et al : Anter-natal hydronephrosis as a predictor of postnatal out-come : a meta-analysis. Pediatrics, 118, 586-593, 2006.

30) Maizels, M., Reisman, M. E., Flom, L. S., et al : Gradingnephroureteral dilatation detected in the first year oflife : correlation with obstruction. J. Urol., 148, 609-614,1992.

31) Palmer, L. S., Maizels, M., Cartwright, P. C., et al : Sur-gery versus observation for managing obstructivegrade 3 to 4 unilateral hydronephrosis : a report fromthe Society for Fetal Urology. J. Urol., 159, 222-228,1998.

32) Onen, A. : An alternative grading system to refine thecriteria for severity of hydronephrosis and optimaltreatment guideline in neonates with primary UPJ-type hydronephrosis. J. Pediatr. Urol., 3, 200-205, 2007.

33) Grignon, A., Filion, R., Filatrault, D., et al : Urinarytract dilatation in uretero : classification and clinicalapplications. Radiology, 160, 645-647, 1986.

34) Sairam, S., Al-Habib, A., Sasson, S., et al : Natural his-tory of fetal hydronephrosis diagnosed on mid-trimesterultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol., 17, 191-196,2001.

35) Kapadia, H., Lidefelt, K. J., Erasmie, U., et al : Antena-tal renal pelvis dilateon emphasizing vesicouretericreflux : two-year follow-up of minor postnatal dilata-tion. Acta. Paediatr., 93, 336-339, 2004.

36) Riccabona, M., Avni, F. E., Blickman, J. G., et al : Imag-ing recommendations in paediatric uroradiology : min-utes of the ESPR workgroup session on urinay tractinfection, fetal hydronephrosis, urinary tract ultra-sonography and voiding cystourethrography, Barce-lona, Spain, June 2007. Pediatr. Radiol., 38, 138-145,2008.

37) Shapiro, S. R., Wahl, E. F., Silberstein, M. J., et al : Hy-dronephrosis index : a new method to track patientswith hydronephrosis quantitatively. Urology, 72, 536-538, 2008.

38) Nguyen, H. T., Benson, C. B., Bromley, B., et al : Multi-disciplinary consensus on the classification of prenatal

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

2297

and postnatal urinary tract dilatation (UTD classifica-tion system). J. Pediatr. Urol., 10, 982-998, 2014.

39) Conway, J. J., Maizels, M. : The !well tempered" diu-retic renogram : a standard method to examine theasymptomatic neonate with hydronephrosis or hy-droureteronephrosis. A report from combined meet-ings of The Society for Fetal Urology and members ofThe Pediatric Nuclear Medicine Council--The Societyof Nuclear Medicine. J. Nucl. Med., 33, 2047-2051, 1992.

40) Boubaker, A., Prior, J., Antonescu, C., et al : F+0renography in neonates and infants younger than 6months : an accurate method to diagnose severe ob-structive uropathy. J. Nucl. Med., 42, 1780-1788, 2001.

41) Liu, Y., Ghesani, N. V., Skurnick, J. H., et al : The F + 0protocol for diuretic renography results in fewer in-terrupted studies due to voiding than the F - 15 proto-col. J. Nucl. Med., 46, 1317-1320, 2005.

42) Donoso, G., Kuyvenhoven, J. D., Ham, H., et al : 99mTc-MAG3 diuretic renography in children : a comparisonbetween F0 and F+20. Nucl. Med. Commun., 24, 1189-1193, 2003.

43) Russell, C. D., Taylor, A. T., Dubovsky, E. V. : Meas-urement of renal function with Technetium-99m-MAG3in children and adult. J. Nucl. Med., 37, 588-593, 1996.

44) Wong, D. C., Rossleigh, M. A., Farnsworth, R. H. : Diu-retic renography with the addition of quantitativegravity-assisted drainage in infants and children. J.Nucl. Med., 41, 1030-1036, 2000.

45) Mandell, G. A., Cooper, J. A., Leonard, J. C., et al. : Pro-cedure guideline for diuretic renography in children.Society of Nuclear Medicine. J. Nucl. Med., 38, 1647-1650, 1997.

46) Rossleigh, M. A., Thomas, M. Y., Moase, A. L. : Deter-mination of the normal range of furosemide half-clearance times when using Tc- 99m MAG3. Clin.Nucl. Med., 19, 880-882, 1994.

47) Fung, L. C., Khoury, A. E., McLorie, G. A., et al : Evalu-ation of pediatric hydronephrosis using individualizedpressure flow criteria. J. Urol., 154, 671-676, 1995.

48) Ulman, I., Jayanthi, V. R., Koff, S. A. : The long-termfollowup of newborns with severe unilateral hy-dronephrosis initially treated nonoperatively. J. Urol.,164, 1101-1105, 2000.

49) Amarante, J., Anderson, P. J., Gordon, I. : Impaireddrainage on diuretic renography using half-time orpelvic excretion efficiency is not a sign of obstructionin children with a prenatal diagnosis of unilateral re-nal pelvic dilatation. J. Urol., 169, 1828-18331, 2003.

50) Heinlen, J. E., Manatt, C. S., Bright, B. C., et al : Opera-tive versus nonoperative management of ureteropel-vic junction obstruction in children. Urology, 73, 521-525, 2009.

51) Apocalypse, G. T., Oliveira, E. A., Rabelo, E. A., et al :Outcome of apparent ureteropelvic junction obstruc-

tion identified by investigation of fetal hydronephro-sis. Int. Urol. Nephrol., 35, 441-448, 2003.

52) Yilmaz, E., Guney, S. : Giant hydronephrosis due toureteropelvic junction obstruction in a child : CT andMR appearances. Clin. Imaging., 26, 125-128, 2002.

53) Rabah, D., Soderdahl, D. W., McAdams, P. D., et al :Ureteropelvic junction obstruction : does CT angiog-raphy allow better selection of therapeutic modalitiesand better patient outcome? J, Endourol., 18, 427-430,2004.

54) Mitterberger, M., Pinggera, G. M., Neururer, R., et al :Comparison of contrast-enhanced color doppler imag-ing (CDI), computed tomography (CT), and magneticresonance imaging (MRI) for the detection of crossingvessels in patients with ureteropelvic junction ob-struction (UPJO). Eur. Urol., 53, 1254-1260, 2008.

55) Emad-Eldin, S., Abdelaziz, O., El-Diasty, T. A. : Diagno-sis value of combined static-eccretory MR Urographyin child with hydronephrosis. J. Adv. Res., 6, 145-153,2014.

56) Grattan-Smith, J. D., Little, S. B., Jones, R. A. : MRurography evaluation of obstructive uropathy. Peditr.Radiol., 38, S49-S69, 2008.

57) Hadjidekov, G., Hadjidekova, S., Tonchev, Z., et al : As-sessing renal function in children with hydronephro-sis - additional feature of MR urography. Radiol. On-col., 45, 248-258, 2011.

58) Kim, Y. S., Do, S. H., Hong, C. H., et al : Does every pa-tient with ureteropelvic junction obstruction needvoiding cystourethrography? J. Urol., 165 : 2305-2307,2001.

59) Lebowitz, R. L., Blickman, J. G. : The coexistence ofureteropelvic junction obstruction and reflux. A. J. R.Am. J. Reentgenol., 140, 231-238, 1983.

60) Szymaski, K. M., Al-Said, A. N., Pippi Salle, J. L. : Do in-fants with mild prenatall hydronephrosis benefit fromscreening for vesicoureteral reflux? J. Urol., 188, 576-581, 2012.

61) Coelho, G. M., Bouzada, M. C., Lemos, G. S., et al : Riskfactors for urinary tract infection in children with pre-natal renal pelvic dilatation. J. Urol., 179, 284-289, 2008.

62) Peters, C. A., Skoog, S. J., Arant, Jr. B. S., et al : Sum-mary of the AUA guideline on management of pri-mary vesicoureteral reflux in children. J. Urol., 184,1134-1144, 2010.

63) Tekgül, S., Riedmiller, H., Hoebeke, P., et al : EuropeanAssociation of Urology. EAU guidelines on vesi-coureteral reflux in children. Eur. Urol., 62, 534-542,2012.

64) Sencan, A., Carvas, F., Hekimoglu, I. C., et al : Urinarytract infection and vesicoureteral reflux in childrenwith mild antenatal hydronephrosis. J. Pediatr. Urol.,10, 1008-1013, 2014.

65) Riccabona, M. : Obstructive diseases of the urinary

!"#$%&'()'*+,-./0123456789 2016:;<5=

2398

tract in children : lessons from the last 15 years. Pedi-atr. Radiol., 40, 947-955, 2010.

66) Braga, L. H., Lorenzo, A. J., Bägli, D. J., et al : Risk fac-tors for recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstructionafter open pyeloplasty in a large pediatric cohort. J.Urol., 180, 1684-1687, 2008.

67) Moodley, P., Demaria, J., Lorenzo, A. J., et al : Concur-rent ureteropelvic and ureterovesical junction ob-struction in children : the value of retrograde pyelo-graphy. J. Pediatr. Urol., 6, 117-121, 2010.

68) Veenboer, P. W., de Jong, T. P. : Antegrade pressuremeasurement as a diagnostic tool in modern pediatricurology. World J. Urol., 29, 737-741, 2011.

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

2499

1!!"#$%"#&$%CAP&''#!"#$%"#&$%CAP&''##()*+,()*-./01234#5+&6*-7*898:CAP;*<%=4>?@,$AB-./CD0Evesicoureteral reflux :VUR!&F12;GHI<#J3KLM4N?O9P98MQ1-3!0&R;UPJO#S+)MTU+SVL*8%:W5&4N;?X#!"#$%"06#UPJO#&$%CAP&''#;YZ$%[F0\&7;]8#9^$%:;-.%:\L34#<=_>9 abcd?efgErandomizedcontrolled trial : RCT!-@2I<04N&AP+7Bh&/CiDE"F#jkBCAP&:;#;*lM?&4.%4!:a!CAP;Gm$%4NnH$%"4+iD&E"opq-n8\X;IJ#CAP

&:;#;rs$%4N-.%:LeeV+7B<#tKKLM!"#$%"4302#u8*h=_>#J3)M5!:L2#M/v-./NOwEvoiding cystourethrography :VCUG!;x80&RyVVUR;GH)*z/07Bh1P{&/CiDE"F+SFUESociety for Fetal Urology!8Qgrade 144|&}0grade 24?14|4.~M-0grade 30grade 44+�L�L33|040|Xn8\X;��X)*nH$%"24&CAP;�Q*8%:)y)0iD"&tK&MQ#/��#*��)MJR;S8*8%"2-./0iDE"F-�TU�KLM�V#;4N�V-�W)*8%:SongV+7B<tK&nH$%"Egrade 3!4!&1052#

u8*07Bh1P&��;h=_>#J3)M6!:"2XY+UPJO&75"2X0�Z/C&[��;'$%30"24.%:L24VUR-(+KL*8%-07Bh6��34#UPJO�4232E30.7|!0�Z/C[��;\Q%�4+152E50|!XnF#/CiD-}VLM\XyV0nH$%"4&CAP;�Q*8%:�4X?)iD&E"F-n8��#.%-0tK&MQ&/��#()*+=]*&��-98:b!CAP;^;X$%4N�H$%"4+CAP;^;X$%^�-5_>4.%:

�H$%"Egrade 1!2!;'$%4162E623%!#u8*0`�14.6��{&'a#/CiD"Efebrile urinary tractinfection : fUTI!E"F;h=_>#J3)M4N7!4+0�X��&"24$%"- b)fUTI;BM)M?&+0.7|&}4.~M\XyVCAP;¡+)*898:SencanV?�H$%"Egrade 1!2.%8+c¢d3£e¤&%f<h¥7!10mm!6922#&)*0`�23��{&��;h=_>#J3)0/CiD"-}VLM&+232E3.3|!&}4.%\XyVCAP+^;4.%X)M8!:AlconcherV+c¢d3£e¤&%f<h¥-5!15mm&)g$%"9820196%#

u8*<=_>#`�15��{&¦§;x~M-01P{480|-¨h�©)0��i#/CiD;E")M?&+92E9|!4.~M\XyV0)g#4.~*?�H&$%"4+CAP&:;+98X)*8%9!:KV#0nH$%"4.~*?CAP;^;X$%4N-.%:�&8<L?-VUR"2;GH)*J3)*8%7#jk$AB4.%:RothV+grade 3!4;ª$!"#$%"&«922#z8*0`�26.8��&��;h=_>#J3)M10!:&R+UPJOz¬$/C;'$%"2#S+KLVUR"2;®�4898:lV+0nH$%"4.~*?VUR;F1)*89¯L°/CiD&E"F+4.3|Xm8\XyV0CAP+:;984.±²X³A*8%:IslekV+nH$%";®´842Egrade 1!4!#u8*<=_>#¦§)0`�18��34#iD;E")M2+9P0KV#07Bh1P4&DMSAµa¶� · 4%n¹;\QM?&?89y~MX4N)M11!:�&TU4?&R;UPJO#S+)0VUR0ºo%f/C0Apq#»¼r%0/C-.½xZ[��;GH)*J3)*8%-0$%"-nH4.~*?/CiD"&opq+=¾I<0%��;BM$�V#?m8\XyVCAP+^;4.±²X³A*8%:

2!/CiD"&opq¿À!"#$%"4&/CiDE"#(s$%¿À;t+

)0nopq�#&)*+CAP;�Q%@Á=-.%:CAP&''##()*5+&6*-uVL*8981Â4+tv&Ã@X9%�V#-.%:iD"&opq¿ÀX)*nH$%";ÄÅ%4N5,6!-A

8-0�&�y#?VUR&F112!0ÆÇ3,13!0wÈÉÊ;x~*898xÇ3!0y/ËÌ� c4&zÍÎÏÐa5!011mmÑ=&/CÒ{Ó/C-.½xZ[��2!9�-�WKL*8%:

3!!"#$%"#&$%CAP&1Â!"#$%"#z¯%CAP&|Ô#u8*+Õ}0Ö0×vØÙ9�4»9~*8%-14,15!0>Ú>#+ÛÜ&×Ý&~K#ÞßVL*8%Z8-TBP0�&��+Ñ�&¬²9àaáÐâ6ãyV²y-8�%\X-4B%:�Ö&äÇå×244æç&àaáÐâ�è16!4+0CAP&��#u8*^�-TBP�u#8yLMX&6ã-ªKL*z/äÇå×&{4&�Y-+3~*898?&XYZKL%:��X�é&äÇ�/êå×#&)*xëLMàaáÐâ#¬%4N17!4+0ì�í�;?X#�H$%"4+3!4|0nH$%"#&)*+66!70|&"24îï�;�s$%X&6ã4.~M-0í�#(ëV<��&×Ý&=-�é&×ÝX?e)*ðÐ¶a#ñ=$%F-�2�ny~ME77| vs 40

òóôv

1!"#$%&'()$*+,-./01234/ 5

!"#$%"E%f/C½xZ[��õureteropelvic junction obstruction : UPJO!#&$%��>îï�Econtinuousantibiotic prophylaxis : CAP!&:;##($%ö÷øap+�)P0ù�)Múaûaüp+uVL*898:

äÇ!"#$%"E%f/C½xZ[��!tvÉýB 2016þòóôv

25100

!"#$%&'(15)*+,-./012345,67-.,89:;<=>8?@A9B7CDEFG%#HIE&JKLM,NOPQR-/PQSTUR-V,WX18"MY&Z[,>8A9\]EB7/7 _`MFG%#abc,dMYef8Eghij9F@k/l&CAPEm?@nopqr9s2tuv2%wqxqyr9i7k/=z237@#k,{|,}~ElZ8��iRCT9��MF@914,19"&�)JKL,��E�73��x��RCT,��9��H�%20"#VUR=��2%grade 3!4,B��N�=��/2&�� X¡¢T£¤¥�¦§E3¨©2ªªCAP,\«¬Eª73 9® I�3�°&±(,²D9³´H�@#

hydronephrosisµ�N�"&antibiotic prophylaxisµ¶·�:;<¸¹"=º»¼»½EPub MedM ¾2%77¿ÀI&ÁÂÀªÃÄ/ÅÆ�@ÇÈ&�ÉÊSociety for FetalUrologyµµSFU"consensus statement&Canadian Urologi-cal AssociationµCUA"recommendation=ËeE20¿=ÌÍ2%#

µPÎ ÏÐ"

! "1) Braga, L. H., Mijoic, H., Farrokhyar, F., et al : Antibi-otic prophylaxis for urinary tract infections in antena-tal hydronephrosis. Pediatrics, 131, 251-261, 2013.

2) Herz, D., Merguerian, P., McQuiston, L. : Continuousantibiotic prophylaxis reduces the risk of febrile UTIin children with asymptomatic antenatal hydroneph-rosis with either ureteral dilatation, high-grade vesi-coureteral reflux, or ureterovesical junction obstruc-tion. J. Pediatr. Urol., 10, 650-654, 2014.

3) Zareba, P., Lorenzo, A. J., Braga, L. H. : Risk factors forfebrile urinary tract infection in infants with prenatalhydronephrosis : Comprehensive single center analy-sis. J. Urol., 191, 1614-1619, 2014.

4) Castagnetti, M., Cimador, M., Esposito, C., et al : Anti-biotic prophylaxis in antenatal nonrefluxing hydroneph-rosis, megaureter and ureterocele. Nat. Rev. Urol., 9,321-329. 2012.

5) Lee, J. H., Choi, H. S., Kim, J. K., et al : Nonrefluxingneonatal hydronephrosis and the risk of urinary tractinfection. J. Urol., 179, 1524-1528, 2008.

6) Song, S. H., Lee, S. B., Park, Y. S., et al : Is antibioticprophylaxis necessary in infants with obstructive hy-dronephrosis? J. Urol., 177, 1098-1101, 2007.


8) Sencan, A., Carvas, F., Hekimoglu, I. C., et al : Urinarytract infection and vesicoureteral reflux in childrenwith mild antenatal hydronephrosis. J. Pediatr. Urol.,10, 1008-1013, 2014.

9) Alconcher, L. F., Tombesi, M. M. : Natural history of

bilateral mild isolated antenatal hydronephrosis con-servatory managed. Pediatr. Nephrol., 27, 1119-1123,2012.

10) Roth, C. C., Hubanks, J. M., Bright, B. C., et al : Occur-rence of urinary tract infection in children with sig-nificant upper urinary tract obstruction. Urology, 73,74-78, 2009.

11) Islek, A., Guven, A. G., Koyun, M., et al : Probability ofurinary tract infection in infants with ureteropelvicjunction obstruction : is antibacterial prophylaxis re-ally needed? Pediatr. Nephrol., 26, 1837-1841, 2011.

12) Estrada, C. R., Peters, C. A., Retik, A. B., et al : Vesi-coureteral reflux and urinary tract infection in chil-dren with a history of prenatal hydronephrosis ÑShould voiding cystourethrography be performed incases of postnatally persisted gradeÒhydronephro-sis? J. Urol., 181, 801-807, 2009.

13) Coelho, G. M., Bouzada, M. C. F., Pereira, A. K., et al :Outcome of isolated antenatal hydronephrosis : a pro-spective cohort study. Pediatr. Nephrol., 22, 1727-1734,2007.

14) Nguyen, H. T., Herndon, C. D. A., Cooper, C., et al :The society for fetal urology consensus statement onthe evaluation and management of antenatal hy-dronephrosis. J. Pediatr. Urol., 6, 212-231, 2010.

15) Psooy, K., Pike, J. : Investigation and management ofantenatally detected hydronephrosis. Can. Urol. As-soc. J., 3, 69-72, 2009.

16) Yiee, J. H., Tasian, G. E., Copp, H. L. : Managementtrends in prenatally detected hydronephrosis : na-tional survey of pediatrician practice pattern and anti-biotics use. Urology, 78, 895-901, 2011.

17) Merguerian, P. A., Herz, D. H., McQuiston, L., et al :Variation among pediatric urologists and across 2 con-tinents in antibiotic prophylaxis and evaluation forprenatally detected hydronephrosis : a survey ofAmerican and European pediatric urologists. J. Urol.,184, 1710-1715, 2010.

18) Braga, L. H., Ruzhynsky, V., Pemberton, J., et al :Evaluating practice patterns in postnatal manage-ment of antenatal hydronephrosis : a national surveyof Canadian pediatric urologist and nephrologists.Urology, 83, 909-914, 2014.


20) Braga, L. H., Pemberton, J., Heaman, J., et al : Pilot ran-domized, placebo controlled trial to investigate the ef-fect of antibiotic prophylaxis on the rate of urinarytract infection in infants with prenatal hydronephro-sis. J. Urol., 191, 1501-1507, 2014.

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

26101

1!"#$%!&'()*+,-./0123J4-5-3!"6! "

78UPJO9:;<=;>%?@%#ABCDE$FG;%HI)JKL6MFN"#$%!&'(OPQI*+,-./0123J4-5-3!R"6DSTUPVEDOPWXG)%YZ[\]P _`]P Zab]PGc9)"#$9%!Z&'F)%deR&'Zfg]PVEDOPW

2!h(i(! "

%)jk(I%)*+lS*Zm+]Pdismembered,Mm+FBQnon-dismembered,9-.nU)op$9Idis-membered,DSTUPWdismembered,Iq/*mhXGIr*mh9stNSTUPuMDvw)i(kxI95!100yM0zH){|}.,~�3R�Qi(HOPW

2#$%&'(1�HR1992!2011�R��HI)��)78%)jk(I2�23R;%R�4D�tN��)�92�Z��P;%R�4D��NQPM5�nUNQP1!WXG)1�HR2001!2006�R78%)jk(2,353%R��HI)h(i(I2,177%092.5y!)/��i(I176%07.5y!H)i(�6��7Ih(i(D3.4�H/��i(D8.2�HO�)��Ih(i(HI2.6�)/��i(HI2.7�HOtG2!Wn�9)1�R2005!2010�R78%)jk(15,498%R��HIh(i(I14,116%091.1y!H)��/ ¡i(Z¢cG/��i(I1,382%08.9y!HO�)2008!2010�HI)78%)jk(5,557%£750%013.5y!9��/ ¡i(DBnUG3!W(¤R�S@%)&¥0retrograde pyelography : RP!9¦FN)§R¨SR&'Hi(kxZ��FGrandomized

controlled trial0RCT!IBQWRushton�IRPZST©9%)jk(Z¨SF)0zBi(kxDª�UGMFN)RPR&8@Z«bFNQP4!WXG)Arun�I(¤9RPZStN¬)i(9,R:IB^tGMFNQP5!Wo9)Cock-rell�I%)jk(¤RRP9s�65%£29%044.6y!Hlongnarrow segmentBCR®GB¯°Dª�UGMFN)(¤R±²�³9stN*+D´µnUNQBQ;%HIi(¶¤RRPZ·¸FNQP6!Wn�9)%)jk(¤RRP9s�58%£11%018.9y!Hr*mhDq/*mh9:9BtGM]P5�DOP7!Wr*mh^¹RPR2¨SI%)*+lS*º»¼½0ureteropelvic junction obstruction :UPJO!R¾¿RÀÁÂÃBRH)q/*mhZSÄVEIRPI#;ÅD)r*mhZSÄVE9IRPZ·¸]P5�DOP8!W

78UPJO9:;<=;>%?@%#ABCDE$FG;%HI)Æ~Ç5ÈRGcRJKL6MFN"#$%!&'(9!OPQI*+,-./0123J4-5-3!R"6DSTUPVEDOPWJKL6MFN)%!)*+,-./RQ©UD0Q^Z�É��FG<=IBQW*+,-./R"6IUPJZÊËÆÌËÍ5Dº»]P^DÎË./MBPW%!I&¥>%)ÏÐDÑeHOPD)*+,-./IÒÓ9"6]PGc&¥>%)ÏÐDHÔBQW%YZ[\]P _`]P Zab]PGc9)"#$%

!&'(ZSQ)%deR&'Zfg]PVEDOP10,11!W>q-%deD10y23R;%H¬)%!9s�%deDÕ?F)§R?%)jk(Z¨SFG;%D5�nUNQP12,13!WXG)>q-%deD10y23R;%9ÖFN)%!Z&'×©9%)jk(ZSQ)%deDÕ?FG;%¬5�nUNQP11!Wo9H)%!Z&'FN¬)%deIÕ?×©)�9%)RØ;ZÙuF)%)jk(Ri(kxD#0MBPRH)%!&'IÚÛ;RVE9ÜPÝÔM]PÞ°¬OP14!W

a!mh*ßmh*ß9sPi(kxZ�ÉFGRCTIBQWmh*ßMFNI)q/*8,15-28!)r*7,29-33!)¤/*4,34,35!)àá%BCâãB%HR�/*36!DOPWq/*mhDop$HOPD)q/*mhMr*mhZ�É]PM)i(��)��M¬9r*mhDäQM5�nUNQP37!WXG)r*mhI@q%HIÒß:åRæ;DBQuMDAçH)èé�R;%H¬BêBw SÑeHOtGM5�nUNQP38!W

b!(ë%)jk(Iop$9dismembered,DSTUN��)º»¼½Dìí×©)¾i(9BP4I0!5yHOP17,19-23,30,31,34,39-44!Wnon-dismembered,0Y-V plasty45!)Spiralflap46!)Vertical flap47!BC!I5�%DîBQ5,19,35!W¾i(;%9�QNIdismembered,)%ï*+CE()Y-VplastyBCDSTUN��)�É$0zBi(kx0D90y!Dª�UNQP48-52!WXG)%)EZflapð9jk]Pdismembered,35,53!)UPJZA8]Pdismembered,54,55!)Bypass,56!BC¬5�nUNQPWñòÛ+RóôDõÂ

78ö÷@ø%;0%)*+lS*º»¼½!ùFiúÔ 2016ûüýþF

27102

!"#$%&'()*+,-./01234567!89:;<-=>?@A"#57BCcBDE()6FGDE()6FG6HI1JKLM,+N-OPK>RCT

&2Q"#C,R1ST"#U&3ST!6V(W6*X&'DE()-FGK>YZFGK:[\>Y1O]H^1_`KLU#Z',R6STR6ab!&cY1H^d&:[\>efgLU#58BCh>'ijklmn!abK>,oR6p(qr1JKLA'DE()-FGK>YeFGK:[\>Y1H^d&:[\>e?@fgLU#59BCfs1'DE()6FG-tu./:U()*+,!689:M,+Nvwx373y!ty+zBZ?@fgLU#60BCdB{%|e{%}~()*+,1��#{%|�{%}~!M,+N-OP��K>?@&:UC{%|&%+��|Z�UsgL��'6-0"#U&7-06�jmnl��|"#U&Q7|Z�UsgLU#�eZ�U15,17,20-24,28,34,40,41,55,60,61BCh>'()e�36{%}~1JKL&'��{%15,22,26,28,34,55,62B';�{%23,60B'��67;�{%!��{%20,21,61,63,64BZ?@fgLU#CeB��i��,R6��i��eKL�� J¡¢�¢ 7,65,66B'(£19,34B'�3¤(¥¤¦§1¨©�#¡¢�¢ 15,18,26,53,67B'�3¤()¤¦§1¨©�#¡¢�¢ 26,50B'(£1�3¡¢�¢ -ª��#}~50,68B'«¬¤�3¤(¥¤¦§1¨©�#¡¢�¢ 30B:Z�UsgLU#C�� J¡¢�¢ &®¯°1t±²³-´µe�#C�� J¡¢�¢ 6¨©¶·&3!12¸·e?@fgLU#17,27,43,62,65BC��i��6HIv�3¤(¥¤¦§1¨©�#¡¢�¢ 6HIB!M,+N-OPK>RCT&1Q67!'�g1¹#e��i��6HI&M,+N1º»K:Uefg#15BC>¼'½¾WyZ31ye¿:u'M,+N&87!88ÀeÁUCSmiths&(£"#U&�3¤(¥¤¦§1¡¢�¢ -¨©K>52ye'Â¨©65y-OP��K>e�Ã'ÄÅ¶·&¨©YZ2.1Æ'Â¨©Y!&2.6Æ!"�'fs19Q6ÇÈ-iÉÊ�K'��i��-.\>YZ��i��ÂË.Y¹�A'�Ìg:1½�#ÍÎÏÐ&H^1¿:Ue?@K>v�i��Ë.Y4À'�i��ÂË.Y9ÀB68BCÑÒ1'ÓÔM,1,792yeÕÖ×M,643y-ªØ>��!A��i��-.\>YZ./:[\>Y¹�AÍÎÏÐ&¿:Ue?@fgLU#69BCÙ1'(£e�3¡¢�¢ 1¹#��i��-.\>YZ./:[\>Y¹�AÄÅ¶·ZÚu:#e6?@A"#41BCh>'(£e�� J¡¢�¢ -OPK>��!&'�� J¡¢�¢ -¨©K>YZ(£¨©Y¹�AÄÅ¶·ZÛUe?@fgLU#62BC�� J¡¢�¢ ¨©YeÂ¨©Y6OP!&'�� J¡¢�¢ ¨©YZÂ¨©Y¹�AÄÅ¶·ZÛu70B'V(W6*XZ¹�Üu_`K>e?@fgLU#71BCfB�Ý¨©¡¢�¢ ,R'�Ý1¡¢�¢ -¨©�#'¨©K:U60B'VUR

-%ª�#Wy1½KL67¨©�#4,32,41B:ÒÞ:?@Z"#Z'�Ý¨©¡¢�¢ 6HI!M,+N-OP��K>?@&:UC¨©¶·1ßULA'1Æ8,17,24,25B'2Æ31,65B'

�� J¡¢�¢ -¨©K>$%672Æ26B:ÒÞ!"#C

àáâã(£äå,'�3æ¢��v�� J¡¢�¢ B©ç6è&PubMed!éxvchildrenB'V(Wvhydroneph-rosisB'(£vnephrostomyB-ê�ë��eKL'ÇÈ�ì-.\L=sg>142ÇÈe'ÑÒ1éx'V(W'�3æ¢��vureteral stentB-ê�ë��eKL=sg>118ÇÈ6íî'M,R6�i��:M,1J��#ÇÈ-GU>14Q-ï�K>CàÓÔM,ç6è&éxvchildrenB'()*+,vpyeloplastyB-ê�ë��eKL'ðubMed!ÇÈ�ì-.U'fs1ÕÖ×vlaparoscopyB'ñòó�vrobotB'ôõ×vendoscopyB:ÓÔM,1JöK:UÇÈ-GU>471Q6íî61Q-ï�K>C

v÷� 8ÇB

! "1) Akhavan, A., Merguerian, P. A., Larison, C., et al :Trends in the rates of pediatric pyeloplasty forureteropelvic junction obstruction over 19 Years : aPHIS database study. Adv. Urol., 2014, 14625, 2014.

2) Vemulakonda, V. M., Cowan, C. A., Lendvay, T. S., etal : Surgical management of congenital ureteropelvicjunction obstruction : a Pediatric Health InformationSystem database study. J. Urol., 180, 1689-1692, 2008.

3) Monn, M. F., Bahler, C. D., Schneider, E. B., et al :Trends in robot- assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty inpediatric patients. Urology, 81, 1336-1341, 2013.

4) Rushton, H. G., Salem, Y., Belman, A. B., et al : Pedia-tricpyeloplasty : is routine retrograde pyelographynecessary? J. Urol., 152, 604-606, 1994.

5) Arun, N., Kekre, N. S., Nath, V., et al : Is openpyeloplasty still justified? B. J. U. Int., 80, 379-381, 1997.

6) Cockrell, S. N., Hendren, W. H. : The importance ofvisualizing the ureter before performing a pyeloplasty.J. Urol., 144, 588-592, 1990.

7) Narayanan, S. K., Smith, G., Thomas, G., et al : Does thesurgical approach change the need for a retrogradepyelogram prior to pyeloplasty? J. Pediatr. Urol., 10,835-839, 2014.

8) Braga, L. H. P., Lorenzo, A. J., Bägli, D. J., et al : Riskfactors for recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruc-tion after open pyeloplasty in a large pediatric cohort.J. Urol., 180, 1684-1687, 2008.

9) Shimada, K., Matsumoto, F., Kawagoe, M., et al :Urological emergency in neonates with congenital hy-dronephrosis. Int. J. Urol., 14, 388-392, 2007.

10) Dhillon, H. K. : Prenatally diagnosed hydronephrosis :the Great Ormond Street experience. B. J. U. Int., 81,S2, 39-44, 1998.

11) Bansal, R., Ansari, M. S., Srivastava, A., et al : Long-term results of pyeloplasty in poorly functioning kid-neys in the pediatric age group. J. Pediatr. Urol., 8, 25-28, 2012.

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

28103

12) Aziz, M. A., Hossain, A. Z., Banu, T., et al : In hy-dronephrosis less than 10% kidney function is not anindication for nephrectomy in children. Eur. J. Pediatr.Surg., 12, 304-307, 2002.

13) Gupta, D., Chandrasekharam, V. V. S., Srinivas, M., etal : Percutaneous nephrostomy in childrenwith uretero-pelvic junction obstruction and poor renal function.Urology, 57, 547-550, 2001.

14) Comploj, E., Koen, M., Becker, T., et al : Does a preop-erative percutaneous nephrostomy influence the out-come of pyeloplasty in infants and children? J. Pediatr.Urol., 5, S62, 2009.

15) Arda, I. S., Oguzkurt, P., Sevmis, S. : Transanastomoticstents for dismembered pyeloplasty in children. Pedi-atr. Surg. Int., 18, 115-118, 2002.

16) Baek, M., Park, K., Choi, H. : Long-term outcomes ofdismembered pyeloplasty for midline-crossing gianthydronephrosis caused by ureteropelvic junction ob-struction in children. Urology, 76, 1463-1467, 2010.

17) Chacko, J. K., Koyle, M. A., Mingin, G. C., et al : Theminimally invasive open pyeloplasty. J. Pediatr. Urol.,2, 368-372, 2006.

18) Gupta, D. K., Sharma, S. : Postoperative outcome fol-lowing pyeloplasty in children using miniflank incisionand transanastomotic stent : a prospective observa-tional study. Pediatr. Surg. Int., 27, 509-512, 2011.

19) Hendren, W. H., Radhakrishnan, J., Middleton, A. W. :Pediatric pyleoplasty. J. Pediatr. Surg., 15, 133-144,1980.

20) Le, T. S., Le, C. T., Le, T. H., et al : Transpelvic anasto-motic stenting : a good option for diversion afterpyeloplasty in children. J. Pediatr. Urol., 7, 363-366,2011.

21) Lee, Y. S., Lee, C. N., Kim, M. U., et al : The risk factorsand clinical significance of acute postoperative compli-cations after unstented pediatric pyeloplasty : a singlesurgeon!s experience. J. Pediatr. Surg., 49, 1166-1170,2014.

22) Liss, Z. J., Olsen, T. M., Roelof, B. A, et al : Duration ofurinary leakage after open non-stented dismemberedpyeloplasty in pediatric patients. J. Pediatr. Urol., 9,613-616, 2013.

23) Sutherland, R. W., Chung, S. K., Roth, D. R., et al : Pedi-atric pyeloplasty : outcome analysis based on patientage and surgical technique. Urology, 50, 963-966, 1997.

24) Tal, R., Bar-Sever, Z., Livne, P. M. : Dismemberedpyeloplasty in children : a review of 5 years singlecenter experience. Int. J. Urol., 12, 1028-1031, 2005.

25) Piedrahita, Y. K., Palmer, J. S. : Is one-day hospitaliza-tion after open pyeloplasty possible and safe? Urology,67, 181-184, 2006.

26) Ruiz, E., Soria, R., Ormaechea, E., et al : Simplifiedopen approach to surgical treatment of ureteropelvicjunction obstruction in young children and infants. J.

Urol., 185, 2512-2516, 2011.27) Uygur, M. C., Sahin, A., Tekgül, S., et al : Is routinestenting necessary in pyeloplasty? Pediatr. Surg. Int.,11, 140-141, 1996.

28) VanderBrink, B. A., Cary, C., Cain, M. P. : Kidney in-ternal splint/stent (KISS) catheter revisited for pedi-atric pyeloplasty. Urology, 74, 894-896, 2009.

29) Bajpai, M., Kumar, A., Tripathi, M., et al : Dorsal lum-botomy incision in paediatric pyeloplasty. ANZ. J.Surg., 74, 491-494, 2004.

30) Braga, L. H. P., Lorenzo, A. J., Farhat, W. A., et al : Out-come analysis and cost comparison between external-ized pyeloureteral and standard stents in 470 consecu-tive open pyeloplasties. J. Urol., 180, 1693-1698, 2008.

31) Choo, K. L., Borzi, P. A. : Surgical correction of pelviu-reteric junction obstruction in childhood - dorsal lum-botomy approach and selective internal uretericstenting. Pediatr. Surg. Int., 17, 152-156, 2001.

32) Orland, S. M., Snyder, H. M., Duckett, J. W. : The dor-sal lumbotomy incision in pediatric urological surgery.J. Urol., 138, 963-966, 1987.

33) Sheldon, C. A., Duckett, J. W., Snyder, H. M. : Evolu-tion in the management of infant pyeloplasty. J. Pedi-atr. Surg., 27, 501-505, 1992.

34) Austin, P. F., Cain, M. P., Rink, R. C. : Nephrostomytube drainage with pyeloplasty : is it necessarily a badchoice? J. Urol., 163, 1528-1530, 2000.

35) Tynes, W. V., Warden, S., Devine, C. J. : Advancing V-flap dismembered pyeloplasty. Urology, 18, 235-237,1981.

36) Helmy, T. E., Sarhan, O. M., Sharaf, D. E., et al : Criticalanalysis of outcome after open dismemberedpyeloplasty in ectopic pelvic kidneys in a pediatric co-hort. Urology, 80, 1357-1360, 2012.

37) Wiener, J. S., Roth, D. R. : Outcome based comparisonof surgical approaches for pediatric pyeloplasty : dor-sal lumbar versus flank incision. J. Urol., 159, 2116-2119, 1998.

38) Verma, A., Bajpai, M., Baidya, D. K. : Lumbotomy ap-proach for upper urinary tract surgeries in adoles-cents : feasibility and challenges. J. Pediatr. Urol., 10,1122-1125, 2014.

39) Pohl, H. G., Rushton, H. G., Park, J. S., et al : Early diu-resis renogram findings predict success followingpyeloplasty. J. Urol., 165, 2311-2315, 2001.

40) Guys, J. M., Borella, F., Monfort, G. : Ureteropelvicjunction obstructions : prenatal diagnosis and neona-tal surgery in 47 cases. J. Pediatr. Surg., 23, 156-158,1988.

41) Hussain, S., Frank, J. D. : Complications and length ofhospital stay following stented and unstented paediat-ric pyeloplasties. Br. J. Urol., 73, 87-89, 1994.

42) Kim, J., Park, S., Hwang, H., et al : Comparison of surgi-cal outcomes between dismembered pyeloplasty with

!"#$%&'()'*+,-./0123456789 2016:;<=6

29104

or without ureteral stenting in children with uretero-pelvic junction obstruction. Korean J. Urol., 53, 564-568, 2012.

43) Woo, H. H., Farnsworth, R. H.:Dismembered pyeloplastyin infants under the age of 12 months. Br. J. Urol., 77,449-451, 1996.

44) Castagnetti, M., Berrettini, A., Cimador, M., et al :Complications of trans-anastomotic externalisedstents in open pyeloplasty : influence of the method ofplacement, the duration of stenting, and the associ-ated bladder drainage. Pediatr. Surg. Int., 26, 309-313,2010.

45) Foley, F. E. B. : A new plastic operation for strictureat the uretero-pelvic junction. J. Urol., 167, 1075-1095,2002.

46) Culp, O. S., DeWeerd, J. H. : A pelvic flap operation forcertain types of ureteropelvic obstruction ; prelimi-nary report. Proc. Staff Meet. Mayo Clin., 26, 483-488,1951.

47) Scardino, P. L., Prince, C. L. : Vertical flap uretero-pelvioplasty. South. Med. J., 46, 325-331, 1953.

48) Helmy, T. E., Sarhan, O. M., Hafez, A. T., et al : Surgi-cal management of failed pyeloplasty in children :single-center experience. J. Pediatr. Urol., 5, 87-89,2009.

49) Lim, D. J., Walker, R. D. I. : Management of the failedpyeloplasty. J. Urol., 156, 738-740, 1996.

50) Rohrmann, D., Snyder, H. M., Duckett, J. W., et al : Theoperative management of recurrent ureteropelvicjunction obstruction. J. Urol., 158, 1257-1259, 1997.

51) Thomas, J. C., DeMarco, R. T., Donohoe, J. M., et al :Management of the failed pyeloplasty : a contempo-rary review. J. Urol., 174, 2363-2366, 2005.

52) Romao, R. L. P., Koyle, M. A., Pippi Salle, J. L., et al :Failed pyeloplasty in children : revisiting the un-known. Urology, 82, 1145-1147, 2013.

53) Diamond, D. A., Nguyen, H. T. : Dismembered V-flappyeloplasty. J. Urol., 166, 233-235, 2001.

54) Palmer, L. S., Proano, J. M., Palmer, J. S. : Renal pelviscuff pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstructionfor the high inserting ureter : an initial experience. J.Urol., 174, 1088-1090, 2005.

55) Neulander, E. Z., Romanowsky, I., Assali, M., et al : Re-nal pelvis flap-guide for ureteral spatulation and han-dling during dismembered pyeloplasty. Urology, 68,1336-1338, 2006.

56) Mesrobian, H. G. O. : Bypass pyeloplasty : descriptionof a procedure and initial results. J. Pediatr. Urol., 5, 34-36, 2009.

57) Pesce, C., Campobasso, P., Costa, L., et al : Ureterovas-cular hydronephrosis in children : is pyeloplasty al-ways necessary? Eur. Urol., 36, 71-74, 1999.

58) Burgu, B., Suer, E., Aydogdu, O., et al : Pelvic reduc-tion during pyeloplasty for antenatal hydronephrosis :

does it affect outcome in ultrasound and nuclear scanpostoperatively? Urology, 76, 169-174, 2010.

59) Morsi, H. A., Mursi, K., Abdelaziz, A. Y., et al : Renalpelvis reduction during dismembered pyeloplasty : isit necessary? J. Pediatr. Urol., 9, 303-306, 2013.

60) Kajbafzadeh, A. M., Tourchi, A., Nezami, B. G., et al :Miniature pyeloplasty as a minimally invasive sur-gery with less than 1 day admission in infants. J. Pedi-atr. Urol., 7, 283-288, 2011.

61) Sheu, J. C., Koh, C. C., Chang, P. Y., et al : Ureteropel-vic junction obstruction in children : 10 years! experi-ence in one institution. Pediatr. Surg. Int., 22, 519-523,2006.

62) McMullin, N., Khor, T., King, P. : Internal uretericstenting following pyeloplasty reduces length of hos-pital stay in children. Br. J. Urol., 72, 370-372, 1993.

63) Bayne, A. P., Lee, K. A., Nelson, E. D., et al : The im-pact of surgical approach and urinary diversion on pa-tient outcomes in pediatric pyeloplasty. J. Urol., 186,1693-1698, 2011.

64) Saing, H., Chan, F. L., Yeung, C. K., et al : Pediatricpyeloplasty : 50 patients with 59 hydronephrotic kid-neys. J. Pediatr. Surg., 24, 346-349, 1989.

65) Chandrasekharam, V. V. S. S. : Is retrograde stentingmore reliable than antegrade stenting for pyeloplastyin infants and children? Urology, 66, 1301-1304, 2005.

66) Ozdemir, T., Arikan, A. : One day hospitalization afteropen, double-J stented pyeloplasty. World J. Pediatr.,6, 271-273, 2010.

67) Shaul, D. B., Cunningham, J. A., Lowe, P., et al : Infantpyeloplasty is a low-risk procedure. J. Pediatr. Surg.,29, 343-347, 1994.

68) Smith, K. E., Holmes, N., Lieb, J. I., et al : Stented ver-sus nonstented pediatric pyeloplasty : a modern seriesand review of the literature. J. Urol., 168, 1127-1130,2002.

69) Sturm, R. M., Chandrasekar, T., Durbin-Johnson, B., etal : Urinary diversion during and after pediatricpyeloplasty : a population based analysis of more than2,000 patients. J. Urol., 192, 214-220, 2014.

70) Woo, J. R., Marietti, S., Masterson, J., et al : Minimal in-cision laparoscopy assisted open pediatric pyeloplasty.J. Pediatr. Urol., 10, 391-393, 2014.

71) Elmalik, K., Chowdhury, M. M., Capps, S. N. J. :Ureteric stents in pyeloplasty : a help or a hindrance?J. Pediatr. Urol., 4, 275-279, 2008.

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

30105

3!"#$%&a!"#$'(!)*&+,-./01&

! "

234567"#$'(!)*&89:"348#;<=>?@/AB$CD9EFGHI%48JK=LM&NOBP6'Q892004(RSTUV%TWTXYZ[\]9>?@/A _-X`L&aZ8Lb=LM(!cd&)de%45fg8optionZfghij7X9k*l48(!cd&4m7n%&X+ofLM

p "#$'(!)*&Z,-./01&TJq:"34567'QWrsKt7X9uvl48,LJq

Z8Lb=L1!Mow9EFGH4m7xyz{45fg8|}JqZ8Lb=LM~ &a(!�H��-xyz{�ureteropelvic junction ob-struction : UPJO!4567"#$%&89�.l(!)*&9��O(!)*&9,-./01&4/0Kt72-5!M2345fg89�.l(!)*&X�W�1l]9��O(!)*&8(�34�;t71,6!M,-./01&T'Q8�CgU=L7-9!M� &NOZ��O1998(T��]T%&d�882��70!100�!ZKtgL

71!MTállai;891990(<;2002(o]4��fw4.5�R�T37%�2�(311.5�!T23%45fg9�.l(!)*&B�L9de4889�]hi92345fg8��]&N=&aZ'QfgL710!MSchenkman;89�.l(!)*&�n�8!Z(!cd&

�n�20!T%&d�B��4��f9de4X�t�t88�993�]hi%&d�8��=�9 ¡¢V8£¤]h7WTT9�.l(!)*&TYjX¥A¦X`LZ'QfgL711!MSzydel/ko;89�.l(!)*&�n�75!Z5§$'(

!cd&�n�90!T%&d�B��4��f9de4X�t�t55.4�995.3�]9&¨©G8�.l(!)*&TYjXª<«wZ'Qfg¬i95§$'(!cd&T6OB'QfgL712!MSukumar;89Nationwide Inpatient Sample41998(<

;2010(4®7Ktw919�R'T23UPJO¯°35,275%B8Lg9*9(!cd&9"#$'(!)*&95§$'(!cd&9±²³¦ µ(!c&T&8O4¶Lg:·��B�«gL713!M�T¨]"#$'(!)*&81.4�4�¸tgL7T¹]h7M"#$'(!)*&8&�Tº;IX»T&aZ:¼�W`<«wZ'QfgL7Mow9<GT=>O9¥A¦X`L½Z9 ¡¢VX�W��9»T&a4:¼g6OB$C=LZ¾?¿ÀgL7M"#$'(!)*&89dÁ%4¬LgW5§$'(!cd&4:·fg9%&d�X),]hi9EFGHI%48JKD9:"348#;<=>?@/AB$CD9Â�ÃÄZfgÅC7&aZ8LLXwLMow9"#$'(!)*&T&NOBP6'Q892004(RSTUV%T'QXYZ[\]9Æ(T'Q8@f�9>?@/A _-X`L&aZ8Lb=LM,-./01&Td�W63��47!100�!ZKtgL7X9,Ç=d�BPfwZT'Q8YZ[\=�9>?@/A4@

fL1,7-9!MÈ (!cd&)de%4567n%&1998(T��]T)de%4567%&d�891��66!100�!ZKtgL71!M�ÆT'Q]89Kim;X91986(<;2011(o]T79%T"#$'(!)*&B��4��f92/3TI%45fgÉ�OÊË±.Ì]�L9ÍÎÏAB�«w37%�2�(311.1�!Tde4865�9ÐÑÏAB�«w31%�2�(36.5�!Tde4894�]h«w½Z<;9ÍÎÏAZfg8JK=LX9(!cd&)de%45fg8&8]h7ÒBOBPfgL714!M�C]9Z�4�ÆT'QB¨Ó49*&aT&8O4¶

LgDÔl=ÕsXªLMBraga;8932%TnEOUPJO45fg918%�2�6�!4"#$'(!)*&�LDtW��O4��910%4Ö-×ØÙ .Ú.98%4ÛÜ)*Wf�801&!B914%�2�7.2�!4(!cd&�12%4*9%&92%45§$'%&!B�L9"#$'(!)*&4:·fg�39�!9(!cd&Tde48100�Z&Õ4�9"#$'(!)*&4¬Lg89Z�4¯3T(3X4�R'9�HTÝÞ-X10mmR�TWT89de4Xß<«wZ'QfgL715!MRomao;89*9Wf�85§$'(!cd&B�«w455%Tjà5.9�4%&T)de%Xáâf9ÐÑ%&Zfg"#$'(!)*&BÃÄfwI%X�Fª<«wX9de4850�Z(!cd&�92�!9�H(GHº&�100�!Z:·fgß<«wZ'QfgL716!MPatel;891997(<;2009(o]4�«wdÁ%WãCw157%T"#$'(!)*&Tjà941%8nEOUPJOTÏAZfg�¸tg¬i9dÁBãCw�äTde4883.5�]h«wX95�R'T23%4åfg8975�X)de]hi9�æXh7Z¾?¿ÀgL717!MVeen-boer;W92005(<;2010(o]410%�2�(36.8�!T*9%&95§$%&�TnE%45f9"#$'(!)*&B�L�2�%&çè69/!9&�2� ¡Îè82.8¢9%&º;I8=<«wWTTde4870�Zß�9(!cd)de%45fg8��=CI]h7X9n%&48*9%&XJfg¬i9"#$'(!)*&8¯°¬méJêZë/4ìífwjb]�j¼�]h7Z¾?¿ÀgL718!MfwX«g9(!cd&)de%45fg89"#$'(!)*&WoptionZfgh7X9k*l48(!cd&4m7n%&X+ofLZîb;t7M

"#$'(!)*&¬mé,-./01&�endopyelotomy!923�children!Bï.ð.ñZfgPubMed]�òfw103K<;9J)<¶ó>Zô¸t718KT?LBõ8fwM

�2ö ÷ø!

23ùúOû(I�(!�H��-xyz{!üA%õ� 2016+ýþÏA

31106

b!"#$%&'()*! "

+,-./0"#$%&'()*12345*6789:25*;<=>?@AB0C==2DEF<1GH2IJ=KLMNOPM@AB0QRSM-TU2VWCXYZ[\]5*6 _ U0Q5*ab6Y0cd-e9:fgYhijkl1YZm26H-5nop-.9:12qrY"#$=stuvkw@xyz{|=}05*~u�-��x��}0Q{"��u~2�"��u~Z�UC�?�Gm}�2Z�Um�Z�=fgYhijkl1YZQ��"#$%&'()*12��[\]Y5*69:F��U0m2�;��1qrYhijkl1YZQ

# $1) Figenshau, R. S., Clayman, R. V. : Endourologic optionsfor management of ureteropelvic junction obstructionin the pediatric patient. Urol. Clin. North. Am., 25, 199-209, 1998.

2) Figenshau, R. S., Clayman, R. V., Colberg, J. W., et al :Pediatric endopyelotomy : the Washington Universityexperience. J. Urol., 156, 2025-2030, 1996.

3) Rodrigues Netto, N. Jr., Ikari, O., Esteves, S. C., et al :Antegrade endopyelotomy for pelvi-ureteric junctionobstruction in children. Br. J. Urol., 78, 607-612, 1996.

4) Bogaert, G. A., Kogan, B. A., Mevorach, R. A., et al : Ef-ficacy of retrograde endopyelotomy in children. J.Urol., 156, 734-737, 1996.

5) Capolicchio, G., Homsy, Y. L., Houle, A. M., et al : Long-term results of percutaneous endopyelotomy in thetreatment of children with failed open pyeloplasty. J.Urol. 158, 1534-1537, 1997.

6) Bolton, D. M., Bogaert, G. A., Mevorach, R. A., et al :Pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction treatedwith retrograde endopyelotomy. Urology, 44, 609-613,1994.

7) Tan, H. L., Roberts, J. P., Grattan-Smith, D. : Retro-grade balloon dilation of ureteropelvic obstructions ininfants and children : early results. Urology, 46, 89-91,1995.

8) Sugita, Y., Clarnette, T. D., Hutson, J. M. : Retrogradeballoon dilatation for primary pelvi-ureteric junctionstenosis in children. Br. J. Urol., 77, 587-589, 1996.

9) Wilkinson, A. G., Azmy, A. : Balloon dilatation of thepelviureteric junction in children : early experienceand pitfalls. Pediatr. Radiol., 26, 882-886, 1996.

10) Tállai, B., Salah, M. A., Flaskó, T., et al : En-

dopyelotomy in childhood : our experience with 37 pa-tients. J. Endourol., 18, 952-958, 2004.

11) Schenkman, E. M., Tarry, W. F. : Comparison of percu-taneous endopyelotomy with open pyeloplasty for pe-diatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J. Urol., 159,1013-1015, 1998.

12) Szydel/ko, T., Kopec! , R., Kasprzak, J., et al : Antegradeendopyelotomy versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty forprimary ureteropelvic junction obstruction. J. Laparoen-dosc. Adv. Surg. Tech. A., 19, 45-51, 2009.

13) Sukumar, S., Roghmann, F., Sood, A., et al : Correctionof ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children : na-tional trends and comparative effectiveness in opera-tive outcomes. J. Endourol., 28, 592-598, 2014.

14) Kim, E. H., Tanagho, Y. S., Traxel, E. J., et al : En-dopyelotomy for pediatric ureteropelvic junction ob-struction : a review of our 25-year experience. J. Urol.,188, 1628-1633, 2012.

15) Braga, L. H., Lorenzo, A. J., Skeldon, S., et al : Failedpyeloplasty in children : comparative analysis of retro-grade endopyelotomy versus redo pyeloplasty. J.Urol., 178, 2571-2575, 2007.

16) Romao, R. L., Koyle, M. A., Pippi Salle, J. L., et al :Failed pyeloplasty in children : revisiting the un-known. Urology, 82, 1145-1147, 2013.

17) Patel, T., Kellner, C. P., Katsumi, H., et al : Efficacy ofendopyelotomy in patients with secondary uretero-pelvic junction obstruction. J. Endourol., 25, 587-591,2011.

18) Veenboer, P. W., Chrzan, R., Dik, P., et al : Secondaryendoscopic pyelotomy in children with failedpyeloplasty. Urology, 77, 1450-1454, 2011.

� "#$%&'()*=ab"#$5*12��,-C��0��}06=��C}0m1-8!25*abcd-�Z:12* ={|N¡¢-£¤/06¥¦m§BYZQGarcía-Aparici 1212 ©ª%=«,-�Z:�¬�-"#$5*®¯cd5.15©2®¯°±7.02kg!6345*®¯cd4.25 ©2®¯°±6.78kg!=78²³@´¥Yy:Z0m25*;<1"#$5*-´Z:Kµ-?�yzC==2DEF<1GH25*)¶N·¸¹-KµYº1YH212 ©ª%=«,-.

9:COP-&'()*m»x��06��9:Z07!QTurner C229¼=1nª%®¯cd6 ©2®¯°±7.9kg!=«,-.9:"#$%&'()*@xZ2®¯5*;<245r2)½¾92¿�}yz6��9:Z08!Q� -2Kutikov CÀ�6 ©ª%=«,-.9:COP-»x��06��9:Z01!Qvan der Toorn 123nª%�}y:COP-x_069:Z05!Q9�9Ym`2+,="#$5*�12)Á-7�&'ÂÃÄxÅ=Æ31�Ç�}0m2È·=ÉÇÊmËZz

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

32107

!9"#$%&!"'&#()*+$,-./012%345210"678#&'()9*:;<=>?@A?B&C2$#5D+,EF'GE-H.*I%#-JEKL$M/&NO)PQ&R0ST2UVG52$ST211"6WEXY$()#,-Z[\]112&*1523.EKL\45G#$%&^_KL&à)*#5DbcEd'Gef12g$./0()a2%3\52g$\hijT)a212"6(8\k)#,-E-H.$alm6Enoj1Tp#7q8r9s;tu:vw-E,-;<*5Dbc\=>G#5D+,Ed'&#()*#x?r9s;Eyz{|B}.fk8KLE52,-~{�&C�flUVG52$��jT26� @��$]A�F'&#12u:vw-*+$,-\7q-�G52\#9s;tu:vw-4BCE@��]A�.D!#+$,-$E�raw�F�88!100�"\%3ST)a21-4,9,12,13"6�G�&�()*#Fedelinij*2362EKLG#-H�G�\3.8��ByIJ&�124Er�"#�-_�G��)Kr�"\13.6�#�J\45r�G�*5.9�G5�#]Ar,-G52$�L��)a212"6� +$,-$EM��N8&#+$,-$M�(8��#9s;tu:vw-EO6*#-��P_[\Qag$#J�&�\Qag$#�R�&ST2g$\hijT25,6,9,14,15"68 (#¡T(8M-\45G#+$,-&MU-H.\I%#,-Z[\U%#learning curve4Ua14,16"6Pennj*#+$,-$9s;,-EF¢VRCT.fa#

9s;,-G*,-Z[\Ua4EEJ�&�*Q%#WX*+$,-$BYG5k8$%3()a217"6Seixas-Mikelusj*#£¤¥¦&C�#+$,-�n§486"$9s;,-�n§346"EO)z }A©ªGEM�.fk)a269s;,-G*#7�\«,-�u:vw-¬4�#uZ[\-¬2�#®{B¯]¬1�".fk)a2E&#()#+$,-G*1�G5k8$%3()a215"6Dingemannj*#F'9s;,-&�12systematic reviewEHG#u:vw-*J�_[EQ°\±²7T2g$.%3()a218"6�^#Knoedlerj*2004;oj2008;E_³&`�2Na-tionwide Inpatient Sample.Xa8¥¦G#195`�E9s;tu:vw-�n§164" C´+$u:vw-�n§4,426"EM�R0.fa#-��G�#J�_[#J�WX&@µr¶*D!rok8$%3()a219"678#a·2;[EQ_w¸G*#O)z }A©ª&C2b¹G?uºcE»d�tracer clearanceE¼e\D!jT#+$,-$E�\ra$E%345220"6Tanakaj*39F'`�&`�25,2612E£¤¥¦.fa#+$,-�n§4,937"$9s;,-�n§324"EM�R0G*#9s;,-GJ�_[EQ°$-�Efgh½X/E¾¿.D!8$%3()a26(o(#gE¶*10DbcEF'&à)En@µG5�#10D+,G*i-�EÀÁ�&¶*D!rok8$%3()a221"6Meij*#1,4032EF'u:vw-&�12£¤¥¦.fk8$gÂ#9s;tu:vw-�n§694"*+$u:vw-�n§7,334"$M�(),-Z[\Ua4EE#ja��ByklFG#J�_[4Q%#w�F$�G�G*i-�[&@µ¶*D!rok8$%3()a222"6

Ã ,-ÄÅÆ{~¬K9mÄÅÆ{~vs�9mÄÅÆ{~+$u:vw-*�9mÄÅÆ{~GflE\�N8G

5�#9s*n9EoÇ�-�?zÈ�EÉ�Ê#9s*ËEÌÍ�)Epq.r�2g$\GV26WT&#()K9mÄÅÆ{~Gflg$\�N8G529s;tu:vw-G*#gTj�G�.sÎSÏ2$alÐÑÒB�*ra4EE#tL8&É�Ê*u!ra6�^G#F'E9s;t,-G*4Ó(4-�9s*Evw\xaÔ�Gra$E%345223"6K9mÄÅÆ{~&à)4#ÕyG*Kz[m{|}&C��9msGÖ�GV28!#-�E9sËE)KE×c�\¿r%/0ST2-�G529,24,25"6F'&#()49s;tu:vw-.�9mÄÅÆ{~Gf l$12Øn4D!jT226-32"6Suboticj*#a·130ÙÚEF'412&#(#�9mÄÅÆ{~&C29s;tu:vw-.fa#a·,-Z[120?#w�F*88�G5k8$%3()a228"6Zhouj*#a·36ÙÚEF' C !"'602&#(#�9mÄÅÆ{~&C29s;tu:vw-.fa#^_22*+$,-ËE~Û.�Ür%ST8\#a·,-Z[70?#a·24ÙÚEKÝmÞGEw�F*100�G5k8$%3()a230"6Canonj*#�9mÄÅÆ{~$K9mÄÅÆ{~&C29s;tu:vw-$EM�.fa#;<#w�F#J�_[#fgh½X�.&ßa*rok8\#,-Z[*�9mÄÅÆ{~&à)U%#K9mÄÅÆ{~Eàl\#�Vr�á{�GE��\×cG5�#âf�E��Bykl4�HG#�R�&ST)a2g$oj#K9mÄÅÆ{~GflUVG52$%3()a227"6Vallaj*#�9mÄÅÆ{~&C29s;tu:vw-$+$u:vw-E�ãVEM�R0.fa#�9mÄÅÆ{~&C29s;tu:vw-\,-Z[*Uok84EE#J�_[*Q%#�G��WTäT27�#29�"#w�F�96�#97�"4BYG5k8$%3()a231"6Blancj*#åæe\GfÔT8�9mÄÅÆ{~&C29s;tu:vw-3902�a·;<6.2D".�ãV&¥¦(#a·,-Z[185?#a·J�_[2&#«,-*2�EnG5k8$%3()a232"6Badawyj*#�9mÄÅÆ{~$K9mÄÅÆ{~EF¢V�çèM�ØL.fa#�9mÄÅÆ{~Eàl\#,-Z[$J�_[EQ°#�_Eéêëì�E�P#�_EKíîïE«+.D!8$%3()a233"6�9mÄÅÆ{~&C29s;tu:vw-*ða�á{

�GE,-$r�#$%&!"'&#()*or�¡T(8M-\45G526K9mÄÅÆ{~#�9mÄÅÆ{~aÓT4�U�Q\5�#aÓT\CaoE�ñrÐÑÒB�*ra6ò �ó�9s;tu:vw-�.C�FS%12Øn$()#�ó�9s;tu:vw-

E@X�E%345234-37"6Tugcuj*112EF'2�a·;<10D"&#()�ó�9s;tu:vw-.fa#a·,-Z[182.5?#a·J�_[2&[#w�F100�$%3()a234"6Naitohj*#142EF'2�a·;<7.1D"&#()�ó�9s;tu:vw-.fa#a·,-Z[*243?G#Be\Gfk87q8r9s;tu:vw-�229?"$@µ¶.D!Ó#�R�$-��gEm6oj�ó�9s;tu:vw-ESô�.%3()a236"6

F'��õu��u:)ëöf��Ý÷ø"ù�,úV 2016ûüýþ�

33108

!"#$%&'()*+,-./01$%&'()*+,23456789:;<=>?@ABCDEF5G6HI=>6-451IJKLMNAOP:QRSTUVIW

$%&'()*+,X,Ylaparoscopic pyeloplastyZE[\]\ S_`PubMedabc_?defghiX,Ej<=246kG5?$%&'()*+,S_`lmGnoRSTUVI36kApqErC_=Ws=tuAvwxy$%&X,z{ |{M}~�S_=W

Y�� Z

! "1) Kutikov, A., Resnick, M., Casale, P. : Laparoscopicpyeloplasty in the infant younger than 6 months--is ittechnically possible? J. Urol., 175, 1477-1479, 2006.

2) Metzelder, M. L., Schier, F., Petersen, C., et al : Laparo-scopic transabdominal pyeloplasty in children is feasi-ble irrespective of age. J. Urol., 175, 688-691, 2006.

3) Neheman, A., Noh, P. H., Piaggio, L., et al : The role oflaparoscopic surgery for urinary tract reconstructionin infants weighing less than 10 kg : a comparisonwith open surgery. J. Pediatr. Urol., 4, 192-196, 2008.

4) Ansari, M. S., Mandhani, A., Singh, P., et al : Laparo-scopic pyeloplasty in children : long-term outcome.Int. J. Urol., 15, 881-884, 2008.

5) van der Toorn, F., van den Hoek, J., Wolffenbuttel, K.P., et al : Laparoscopic transperitoneal pyeloplasty inchildren from age of 3 years : our clinical outcomescompared with open surgery. J. Pediatr. Urol., 9, 161-168, 2013.

6) Tong, Q., Zheng, L., Tang, S., et al : Comparisonof laparoscopic-assisted versus open dismemberedpyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction ininfants : intermediate results. Urology, 74, 889-893,2009.

7) García-Aparicio, L., Blazquez-Gomez, E., Martin, O., etal : Anderson-hynes pyeloplasty in patients less than12 months old. Is the laparoscopic approach safe andfeasible? J. Endourol., 28, 906-908, 2014.

8) Turner, R. M. 2nd, Fox, J. A., Tomaszewski, J. J., et al :Laparoscopic pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junctionobstruction in infants. J. Urol., 189, 1503-1507, 2013.

9) Kojima, Y., Umemoto, Y., Mizuno, K., et al : Compari-son of adults and children in laparoscopic pyeloplastyfor ureteropelvic junction obstruction - Lessons learned.J. Urol., 185, 1461-1467, 2011.

10) Ruiz, E., Soria, R., Ormaechea, E., et al : Simplifiedopen approach to surgical treatment of ureteropelvicjunction obstruction in young children and infants. J.Urol., 185, 2512-2516, 2011.

11)�tvwx��&�� :vwx$%&X,z{ |{M2014��. Jpn. J. Endourol., 27, 1-46, 2014.

12) Fedelini, P., Verze, P., Meccariello, C., et al : Intraop-erative and postoperative complications of laparo-

scopic pyeloplasty : a single surgical team experiencewith 236 cases. J. Endourol., 27, 1224-1229, 2013.

13) Kojima, Y., Sasaki, S., Mizuno, K., et al : Laparoscopicdismembered pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junctionobstruction in children. Int. J. Urol., 16, 472-476, 2009.

14) Piaggio, L. A., Franc-Guimond, J., Noh, P. H., et al :Transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty for primaryrepair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in infantsand children : comparison with open surgery. J. Urol.,178, 1579-1583, 2007.

15) Seixas-Mikelus, S. A., Jenkins, L. C., Williot, P., et al :Pediatric pyeloplasty : comparison of literature meta-analysis of laparoscopic and open techniques withopen surgery at a single institution. J. Urol., 182, 2428-2432, 2009.

16) Herndon, C. D., Herbst, K., Smith, C. : The transitionfrom open to laparoscopic pediatric pyeloplasty : asingle-surgeon experience. J. Pediatr. Urol., 9, 409-414,2013.

17) Penn, H. A., Gatti, J. M., Hoestje, S. M., et al : Laparo-scopic versus open pyeloplasty in children : prelimi-nary report of a prospective randomized trial. J. Urol.,184, 690-695, 2010.

18) Dingemann, J., Ure, B. M. : Systematic review of level1 evidence for laparoscopic pediatric surgery : do ourprocedures comply with the requirements ofevidence-based medicine? Eur. J. Pediatr. Surg., 23,474-479, 2013.

19) Knoedler, J., Han, L., Granberg, C., et al : Population-based comparison of laparoscopic and openpyeloplasty in paediatric pelvi-ureteric junction ob-struction. B. J. U. Int., 111, 1141-1147, 2013.

20) Szavay, P. O., Luithle, T., Seitz, G., et al : Functionaloutcome after laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplastyin children. J. Pediatr. Urol., 6, 359-363, 2010.

21) Tanaka, S. T., Grantham, J. A., Thomas, J. C., et al :A comparison of open vs laparoscopic pediatricpyeloplasty using the pediatric health informationsystem database--do benefits of laparoscopic approachrecede at younger ages? J. Urol., 180, 1479-1485, 2008.

22) Mei, H., Pu, J., Yang, C., et al : Laparoscopic versusopen pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruc-tion in children : a systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Endourol., 25, 727-736, 2011.

23) Moore, R. G., Kavoussi, L. R., Bloom, D. A., et al : Post-operative adhesion formation after urological la-paroscopy in the pediatric population. J. Urol., 153, 792-795, 1995

24) Han, H. H., Ham, W. S., Kim, J. H., et al : Transmeso-colic approach for left side laparoscopic pyeloplasty :comparison with laterocolic approach in the initiallearning period. Yonsei Med. J., 54, 197-203, 2013.

25) Sedlác

!

ek, J., Koc

!

vara, R., Molc

!

an, J., et al : Transmeso-colic laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children : a standard

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

34109

c!"#$%&'(!)*+! "

,-./01"#$%&'(!)*+234"5+67895+:;<=>#?$@A6BCADEF1GHI33JKLM3N%O?PQ&R3STUVWXYTZ.[\]3[ _à(!bcdefghij1Gk'-./01lmanopWX2aq34"5+.;<=]5+rs2tquX%vww1f3xyzsf{q3|}A.(~3)�v�aQ��5+:��~1G*+i2��,�ij1G

approach for the left-side repair. J. Pediatr. Urol., 6,171-177, 2010.

26) Yeung, C. K., Tam, Y. H., Sihoe, J. D., et al : Retroperi-toneoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty for pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction in infants and children.B. J. U. Int., 87, 509-513, 2001.

27) Canon, S. J., Jayanthi, V. R., Lowe, G. J. : Which isbetter--retroperitoneoscopic or laparoscopic dismem-bered pyeloplasty in children? J. Urol., 178, 1791-1795,2007.

28) Subotic, S., Weiss, H., Wyler, S., et al : Dismemberedand non-dismembered retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplastyfor the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruc-tion in children. World. J. Urol., 31, 689-95, 2013.

29) Koga, H., Okawada, M., Doi, T., et al : Comparison be-tween closed and open techniques for creating aretroperitoneal space for retroperitoneoscopic renalsurgery in children. Pediatr. Surg. Int., 30, 933-936,2014.

30) Zhou, H., Li, H., Zhang, X., et al : RetroperitoneoscopicAnderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty in infantsand children : a 60-case report. Pediatr. Surg. Int., 25,519-523, 2009.

31) Valla, J. S., Breaud, J., Griffin, S. J., et al : Retroperi-toneoscopic vs open dismembered pyeloplasty for

ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children. J. Pedi-atr. Urol., 5, 368-373, 2009.

32) Blanc, T., Muller, C., Abdoul, H., et al : Retroperitoneallaparoscopic pyeloplasty in children : long-term out-come and critical analysis of 10-year experience in ateaching center. Eur. Urol., 63, 565-572, 2013.

33) Badawy, H., Zoaier, A., Ghoneim, T., et al : Transperi-toneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplastyin children : Randomized clinical trial. J. Pediatr. Urol.,11, 122. e1-6. 2015.

34) Tugcu, V., Ilbey, Y. O., Polat, H., et al : Early experi-ence with laparoendoscopic single-site pyeloplasty inchildren. J. Pediatr. Urol., 7, 187-191, 2011.

35) Zhou, H., Sun, N., Zhang, X., et al : Transumbilical la-paroendoscopic single-site pyeloplasty in infants andchildren : initial experience and short-term outcome.Pediatr. Surg. Int., 28, 321-325, 2012.

36) Naitoh, Y., Kawauchi, A., Yamada, Y., et al : Laparoen-doscopic single-site versus conventional laparoscopicpyeloplasty : a matched pair analysis. Int. J. Urol., 21,793-796, 2014.

37) Caione, P., Lais, A., Nappo, S. G. : One-port retroperi-toneoscopic assisted pyeloplasty versus open dismem-bered pyeloplasty in young children : preliminary ex-perience. J. Urol., 184, 2109-2115, 2010.

� "#$%&'(!)*+?��5+�-.�Q]v��.j 3Kutikov�23��3

��w�8��Hi?9.?k-./="#$%&'(!)*+D��=3�8�i?g��?��2j1v??3k-./=]vlmghij1�:D� =]Q11!G>#.Bansal�v3��3!12��?k-.(!)*+D¡FI"#$%&'¢£b/¤¥+DBC.��i¦I:� =]Q12!Gk-./01"#$%&'5+2§+¨.2ghij1f3"#$%©Tª>«?¬$®W¯a°?0±fj1IF3²r³i2²`¨.2��´.:=]210kgµ¢?¶-f·¸¹~1Gº $@A:BCA5+,"#$%2310»?¼½¾1:¿ÀÁD`²=IP

ÂMO3JKLM6ÃÄÅh�[ÆPQN%ODvÇ&RD$=3+1?ÈÉ.[1ÊË2?Ì�3ÍÎa3e.[15+rs?{Ï3Â4?5Â.[1_àÅhÐÑfgh:a1a°3Ò6?7895+.aQ7³D$=]Q1G¹�.STUVWXYTZ.[\]3[ ÓwQdeÔÕ6Ö8ÔÕ

f×?5[ ØÙ.Ú_.�Û�:fi¦1G=If\]3"#$%&'5+2,-(!)*+.�Q]v$9aÜÝÞ?ßÇ:a Û1:��~1G5+*àv93.9!100á::âij11,3-7!GAtug�237.?,-´.ãäå�-13æ!./="#$%&'(!)*+D��=3äå5+rs184m3äåçyèé1.2èij 3êëì;D<=I´.2aw\I:D� =]Q13!G¹�.3Olsen�2365.?¶-ãäå�-7.9æ!./="#$%&'(!)*+D�7=íî>.[ ��=3äå5+rs143m3äåçyèé2.0è3*ï?294á:� =]Q14!GðÀ?� i25+rsv¹�.{Ï=3äå5+rs105m3äåders46.5mi35+?*ï?v97á:PQ5!GHI3¤ñ../01"#$%&'(!)*+?� vj18-10!GLindgren�2316.ã4"5++�12.3"#$%&'5++�4.!?¤ñ../="#$%&'(!)*+D��=388á?*ï?ij\I:� =]Q18!G

,-òóAô( ã(!bcõ�£ö÷øù!ú;5û¦ 2016üýþì;

35110

! "#$%&'()"#$%&*+,-./$%'$%012()34567389:;<6,7,11=>Yee?7@"#$%@*+,-./$%'$%AB7CDED248F@[email protected]@[email protected]@2.4MNOP@$%'0QR7STDU100VNOW4&563XS<6=>YZ[@Lee?7"#$%&*+,-./$%2\] [()3@_`$%AB7"#$%181F[a3*+,-./b!c0%219F&@de["#$%'fghijW4'[a3@JKLB7"#$%3.5M[a3@*+,-./$%2.3M&@*+,-./$%'fghijW4&563XS<7=>k4@%\'lmnopU*+,-./$%Nde[qrjW4>$%'0QR7"#$%N7100VNOW4'[a3@*+,-./$%N793.9VNOW4&563XS<7=>Dangle?7@"#$%s_`3.31tu=&*+,-./$%s_`7.3tupv0.02='$%012()[email protected] vs [email protected] vs 7.6ml=@z{"|Ms1 vs 1.1=@}~��Ms1.3 vs 1.3=@�b�'��@�p[�7rjW4h@�$%ABs199 vs242F=7@*+,-./$%[�SXde[�jW4&563XS<11=>Sukumar?7@Nationwide Inpatient Sample[��D

419��'��UPJO��35,275�2pSX@"#b!c0%@��b!�"%@��b!c0%@*+,-./b!c%'dp [¡SX()¢£2¤WXS<>2007¥¦P��b!c0%@*+,-./b!c%'wh§¨3X�P@2008¥j?2010¥[7©ª'16.9V2«¬XS4&563XS<12=>*+,-./b!c0%7@"#$%&()3X@%®%\¯°�7Y±N@JKMw7iSU''@²H'³Rh µ@¶·-7¦P S%¸NO<&563XS<12=>Varda?7¹º[�»<2003¥j?2010¥'Premier Per-spectives Database2pS4¼½¾�·¿ÀN@"#b!c0%'Áq&@��b!c0%�¦Â*+,-./b!c0%'§¨2Ã¬@STD'$%U¯°�'ÄÅR7ÆjW4&563XS<>k4@"#$%[()3X@��$%�¦Â*+,-./$%N7JKLB[�7rjW4U''$%ABh�SÇ&@*+,-./$%N7@¶·-h´SÇ&2563XS<13=>*+,-./$%&"#$%2È»4��'ÉÊ'ËÌÍ7@&µ[ÎÏ Ð%\ÑÒ'ÓN*+,-./$%'fghÔÕNOW4&'56UO<14=>k4@��'ÉÊU��U"#b!c0%'%\Ö×¦PU*+,-./b!c0%'%\Ö×2ÕØ@ÎÏ 'ÙÓj?U*+,-./$%'ÚÛ hO<&ÜÝ?D<15=>�Þ'Ç&j?@*+,-./b!c0%7@"#b!c0%&()3X@$%AB7�µ¶·-Ujj<h@JKLBhiµ@ÎÏ [ÚD@ßmUqrSÆàá$%&ÜÝ?D<>â ��$%&'()��$%&'()Uãä56�DXS<>Riachy?7@

*+,-./$%'_`$%ABs209F=7��$%s298F=[()3XiSU''@JKLB@lmn'opåÍ@$%017É%¸[de�2Ã¬rjW4&563XS<16=>Casella?7@*+,-./$%s_`$%AB200F=&��

�$%s265F='¶·-[¡SX()3@ÉæB[de�2Ã¬rjW4&563X�P@�?r<$%AB'iç&*+,-./$%'èé[¦P@��[�SX7*+,-./$%h@��$%[ê ëì<íî hO<&ïðXS<17=>

*+,-./b!c0%srobot pyeloplasty=@��schil-dren=2ñ�ò�ó&3XPubMedN¢ô34508j?@*+,-./b!c0%&3Xõ�j¡ö÷&øìD<178'ùú2ûp34>

s�ü ýþ=

! "1) Kutikov, A., Nguyen, M., Guzzo, T., et al : Robot as-sisted pyeloplasty in the infant-lessons learned. J.Urol., 176, 2237-2239, 2006.

2) Bansal, D., Cost, N. G., Bean, C. M., et al : Infant robot-assisted laparoscopic upper urinary tract reconstruc-tive surgery. J. Pediatr. Urol., 10, 869-874, 2014.

3) Atug, F., Woods, M., Burgess, S. V., et al : Robotic as-sisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children. J. Urol.,174, 1440-1442, 2005.

4) Olsen, L. H., Rawashdeh, Y. F., Jorgensen, T. M. : Pedi-atric robot assisted retroperitoneoscopic pyeloplasty :a 5-year experience. J. Urol., 178, 2137-2141, 2007.

5) Singh, P., Dogra, P. N., Kumar, R., et al. : Out-comes of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty inchildren : a single center experience. J. Endourol., 26,249-253, 2012.

6) Yee, D. S., Shanberg, A. M., Duel, B. P., et al : Initialcomparison of robotic-assisted laparoscopic versusopen pyeloplasty in children. Urology, 67, 599-602,2006.

7) Lee, R. S., Retik, A. B., Borer, J. G., et al : Pediatric ro-bot assisted laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplasty :comparison with a cohort of open surgery. J. Urol.,175, 683-687, 2006.

8) Lindgren, B. W., Hagerty, J., Meyer, T., et al : Robot-assisted laparoscopic reoperative repair for failedpyeloplasty in children : a safe and highly effectivetreatment option. J. Urol., 188, 932-937, 2012.

9) Passerotti, C. C., Nguyen, H. T., Eisner, B. H., et al : La-paroscopic reoperative pediatric pyeloplasty with ro-botic assistance. J. Endourol., 21, 1137-1140, 2007.

10) Hemal, A. K., Mishra, S., Mukharjee, S., et al : Robot as-sisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in patients of uretero-pelvic junction obstruction with previously failedopen surgical repair. Int. J. Urol., 15, 744-746, 2008.

11) Dangle, P. P., Kearns, J., Anderson, B., et al : Outcomesof infants undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopicpyeloplasty compared to open repair. J. Urol., 190,2221-2226, 2013.

12) Sukumar, S., Roghmann, F., Sood, A., et al : Correctionof ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children : na-tional trends and comparative effectiveness in opera-

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

36111

4!UPJO"#$%&VUR'()*+,-./0! "

#!123456789:ureteropelvic junction obstruction : UPJO!"#$%()";<=$%>?"<1.@A&BCDE;<FGHIJK.LMNOPQRSTUG"VBC$%"WXY<=#!>?=$%Z[\] ;FGHIJK"_`S/0Nab;cSTUPJO"#$12de:vesicoureteral reflux : VUR!'fghi`Sjk<lm"<nopRYXFX'=qrVUR;<

UPJO().sr't`TUPJO;12uv&wxy1%BC'cS,-"<z1g#$1{|}:voiding cystoure-thrography : VCUG!'ab;cST~��/0"WXYUPJOUVUR.��Q��`S]<�bF��;cS'=VUR.��0�<�.��"��N+Q`��y'cST

tive outcomes. J. Endourol., 28, 592-598, 2014.13) Varda, B. K., Johnson, E. K., Clark, C., et al : Nationaltrends of perioperative outcomes and costs for open,laparoscopic and robotic pediatric pyeloplasty. J. Urol.,191, 1090-1095, 2014.

14) Freilich, D. A., Penna, F. J., Nelson, C. P., et al : Paren-tal satisfaction after open versus robot assisted la-paroscopic pyeloplasty : results from modified Glas-gow Children!s Benefit Inventory Survey. J. Urol., 183,704-708, 2010.

15) Barbosa, J. A., Barayan, G., Gridley, C. M., et al : Parentand patient perceptions of robotic vs open urologicalsurgery scars in children. J. Urol., 190, 244-250, 2013.

16) Riachy, E., Cost, N. G., Defoor, W. R., et al : Pediatricstandard and robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty :a comparative single institution study. J. Urol., 189,283-287, 2013.

17) Casella, D. P., Fox, J. A., Schneck, F. X., et al : Costanalysis of pediatric robot-assisted and laparoscopicpyeloplasty. J. Urol., 189, 1083-1086, 2013.

a!#$%�#�;<#!�;1'@A`S+�1%$%'i�&GFS'=�&"��Y�.sr<JFSTVUR'FX��#�;#$%�� .<1.2"3¡1,2!;cS'=�.sr<¢£��.70¤.¥¦§;cS3!T?¨;<�.sr<pQ"t©`ST1%$%<BC$%UVBC$%"m'pRSTBC$%<1.@AUBC'LM*YXS'=VBC$%;<�.ªG;HIJK'«¬pRYXS4,5!TUPJO"1%$%'-(*YXR\=#!>?�."

$%.Z®'��;cS'=¯°=±²�³#!´%�<µ¶·¦¸¹"<F�YXFXT#!>?�.º�4�+»¼� HIJK./0�(¹*+»¼.½ '$%¾h§'¿X4!TÀ.+�=$%=Á"VBC$%'cS�";<#!>?�U#$%.Z['?Â*YN=¾hÃÄ.+�HIJK"_`S/0'ab;cS6!Tb!VURUPJO"VUR'()`S§<7.3"11.3¡7,8!;c =w_"VUR.cS»¼.UPJO()§<1¡ÅÆ9,10!UXÇRYXSTfghi.jk<lm"nopRYXFX'=qr.VUR<Èr.VURUÉÊ12ËÌ.ÍÎÏ'5¤qXUXÇR10!=VUR"�S12.ÐÑ&Ò�<�#�.hibÓ.¢ÔUOPQRSTUPJO;12uv&wxy1%BC'cS,-"<VCUG'ab;cSTÕ¼')°`S"<=VUR"_`S12#$Ö×-�

�Ø4`SÙ"UPJO�/0`S½ '�XU=UPJO.~��`SÀU'ÚÛ8,10!pRYX+TKajbafzadehQ11!<VUR"�SÜÝ�UPJOFQ=VUR.Þßà"UPJO'áâ`S]N*RFXUX OP"Nãäå=VURUUPJO'(h*+»¼"VUR"_`S��0��4�+UÀæ=

q§"UPJO.çè/é'¬�QR+T��0�<=UPJOUVUR(h"./0��PS��y'cST

#$%<ureteropelvic junction obstructionUrenal stoneê+<calculi�ëìíìî"PubMed;ïð*+196ñ]Q=¸´]Ô�bUòÇRS6ñ�ó¹*+TôUR<ureteropelvic junction obstruction, vesicoureteralrefluxUchildren�ëìíìîU*YõubMed;ïð*+107ñ]Q=¸´]Ô�bUòÇRS5ñ�ó¹*+T

:ö÷ øù!

# $1) Snyder, H. M. 3rd, Lebowitz, R. L., Colodny, A. H. etal. : Ureteropelvic junction obstruction in children.Urol. Clin. North. Am., 7, 273-290, 1980.

2) Rickwood, A. M., Reiner, I. : Urinary stone formationin children with prenatally diagnosed uropathies. Br.J. Urol., 68, 541-542, 1991.

3) Husmann, D. A. : Ureteropelvic junction obstructionwith concurrent ranal pelvic calculi in the pediatricpatient : a long-term followup. J. Urol., 156, 741-743,1996.

4) Husmann, D. A. : Ureteropelvic junction obasteructionwith a simultaneous renal calculus : long-term fol-lowup. J. Urol., 153, 1399-1402, 1995.

5) Tekin, A., Tekgul, S., Atsu, N., et al : Ureteropelvicjunction obstruction and coexisting renal calculi inchildren : role of metabolic abnormalities. Urology, 57,542-546, 2001.

6) Skolarikos, A., Dellis, A., Knoll, T. : Ureteropelvic ob-

��úy�#�:#!123456789!û0~óå 2016üýþ/0

37112

struction and renal stones : etiology and treatment.Urolithiasis, 43, 5-12, 2015.

7) Hubertus, J., Plieninger, S., Martinovic, V., et al : Chil-dren and adolescents with ureteropelvic junction ob-struction : is an additional voiding cystourethrogramnecessary? Results of a multicenter study. World J.Urol., 31, 683-687, 2013.

8) Kim, Y. S., Do, S. H., Hong, C. H., et al : Does every pa-tient with ureteropelvic junction obstruction needvoiding cystourethrography? J. Urol., 165, 2305-2307,2001.

9) Lebowitz, R. L., Blickman, J. G. : The coexistence ofureteropelvic junction obstruction and reflux. A. J. R.,140, 231-238, 1983.

10) Bomalaski, M. D., Hirschl, R. B., Bloom, D. A. : Vesi-coureteral reflux and ureteropelvic junction obstruc-tion : Association, treatment option and outcome. J.Urol., 157, 969-974, 1997.

11) Kajbafzadeh, A. M., Tourchi, A., Ebadi, M. : The out-come of initial endoscopic treatment in the manage-ment of concomitant vesicoureteral reflux and uretero-pelvic junction obstruction. Urology, 81, 1040-1046,2013.

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

38113

1!"#$%&'!()"*##(+,-./0$1%%&234/56789/"#$0:*;<=>,.1'?@8;<A76!90B%$(C0,D56EF;<1,2!G&'!/H"#$%()!3EF='IJK<H%%L(CML3NO=)PQK<RSC03T2-8!GAmlingQ01982'UQ1992'%V/W*##(+,?XYZ0!12[\%44(47#/]^+_3.8'V@8à?XT>"#$%EF=91B/bQKZA,c^dT<3!GParkQ01986'UQ2004'%V/W*##(+,?XT5'ef@8^Z215(ghij102kl%@8à!/mTd>"#$%EF025Bg54(!/>NO056Bg120(!/bQKZ-.>/"=17Bg36(!Cn6>:*=2Bg5(!/)PQKZA dT<G:*=bQKZ5(h3(C0o0%##(+,?1^>2(C0#2p,=qXJKZ2!GrZ>SarhanQ01998'UQ2008'/qX Z526(%##(+,%stuv##?w Z41(/mS<+_34klg18!84kl!%@8àUQ>"#$%EF=69Bg22(!>/"=22Bg3(!>:*=9Bg3(!C)PQK>:*^Z3(C0TxKHyz!{|go0%##(+,2(>#2p,1(!?1^ZA,c dT<4!G}KQ%,cUQ>W*##(+,.%"#$%EF~NO080!90B30/bQK<-.>/"(=10!20B>:*(=0!5B30/)PQKdT<G��$(/];<4��##(+,��##(+,/mS<&'!3()!"*=��/��JKZ,c0�3TH%%5-7,9!>W*�,A��56%��Cn<A��QK<G��7��/5Yd"#$%:*=�)JKZ��%$(C0o�,n<T0#2p,=qXJKdm6>��7��0�� 8%19?:¡;<ZP%7¢%;<3��A��QK<G��7��0=>H3�£¤Cn6>?¥¦!Cn<}AUQ>,.@8à/mS<@§!��%7¢A d¨©JK<10!G

2!Aª##(+,.%«ª#¬B%"*Aª"#$/];<##(+,.%C#¬B%"*/¢

Td0>��%,cC5Bef%"*?YdEF~:*?:¡^dT<GL(CEF;<ATs,c=bQK<8,11!D.>EF021!63B%$(Cn6>9!28B%$(C0"#$%:*=3�dHC#¬B=:*;<ATs,c12-17!Hn<GC#¬B=EF;<$(%«®¯°A d0>,D%C#¬B±�9,12,18!>,D%#²³%´b12!>µ¶·¬=4%2E16!>¸¹D¶¡(/];<º'�,16,17,19!>»¼½¾

/Fsy¯9%¿8ÀÁ14!>##D.Â15!>«ª##G/mS<ÃHÄÅÆÇÈÉÊI15!34=,cJKdT<GË%7JC>¶¡\'K12,14!��,\'K12,20!>,D%C#¬B±�8,15!>,D%#²³%´J12,15!340;Ì3¯°C03TA%,cHbQKdT<G##(+,./"* ZC#¬B04%\LCMtÍ�%

U>ÎÏÐ!��/5<C#¬B%N¤/mTdË%"*=T¢rCÑ}<%UATs}A/];<�O0�3T11,13,16,18!GMatsumotoQ0Ò�¶¡JKZ"#$/]^d##(+,?XYZ60(%,.@8?�O^>,.1'P%N¤C023B=,D56EF^>62B=/">18B=:*^dTZ=>+_5.5'%@8àCEF=18B>:*=34BCnYZ13!A >700EF ZH%%Ë%./±�;<Ó1Hn<}AUQÔ'!3N¤C0/ÕCCn6>&'!3#¬BN¤?¨©^dT<Gvan den HoekQ00.1!14[g+_4.3[!/�,?XYZ138(?�O^>,.9klC,D/I dEF21B>/"72B>:*7BA dT<=>,.9kl\A3.5'\%IÖC0>EF9B>/"77B>:*14B>3.5'\A5.5'\%IÖC0>EF~:*AH4BCn692B=/"CnYZ}AUQ5'ef@8^Z$(/];<×Ø�ÙÇ�Ú%ÎÏÐ��0/1Cn<A dT<18!GCher-tinQ0¸¹D¶¡JKZ"#$/]^d##(+,?XT>ÛÜ'rC@8àÝBCnYZ49(?�O^>,.6kl\LAÛÜ'?Þ�Z\LC0C#I/"*=3UYZ}A?,c^dT<11!GrZ>ChandrasekharamQ0##(+,.1'?@8^Z$(C0;Ì3C#I%"*0bQK3UYZA,c^dT<16!GC#¬B/ß;<&'!3,c=àQKdm6áâãÊäÆåæ0±TH%%>}KQ%,c?HA/ä;<A&�AH,.5'30%st/0C#I%"*0MtÍ�A��QK<G

3!"#$%çQ9oQ##(+,.>&'?@8^Z./bQK<çQ9oQ

%,c=èéJKdT<GParkQ05'ef@8^Z215(h>5(g2B!/"#$%:*?)P>2(C#2p,>3(Co0%##(+,?XYdT<2!GPsooyQ0,.@8à?5'efXYZ77#%st1#g1.3B!/4ê?·¬/oQ?)Pdm6>o0%##(+,?XYdT<21!GChertinQ0¸¹D¶¡JKZ"#$/]^d##(+,?XTÛÜ'eërC@8?bZ49(h2(g4B!C,.8'PA10'P/"#$%oQ?)P>Rì��##íW,?qX^Z

îï&'@8A¾S

1!"#$%&'()* +

##(+,./0"#$0�Að4%$(CEF^>:*$(05BTUCn<GAª$(/mS<,.C#¬B0>"#$%:*?)P3�AH±�;<$(Hñò;<GC#¬B0>,.ó'0"*;<ÝB9=n<H%%5'30%st/0MtÍ�A��QKdm6>Ë%C#¬B0&'/VZK<A,cJKdT<G,.5'ef@8^Z$(/mTdH>rK3=Q"#$%oQ?b<}A=n<G,.10'ef%@8à? Z,c0ôUCn<=>7%%$(/õ½ö�ÃHG=bQK<AJKdT<G,.%×Ø�ÙÇ�Ú/mS<@§!3��qX\'m5÷JW/7ø^ZH%0ñò^3TG�3�AHø'!3�G��7��0¨©JK<=>T¢rCXsùúU%X�3û@0ñò 3TG

��üY9"#$g##G¾ýX%¿8ÀÁ!¶8�þú 2016Äîï&'@8A¾S

39114

!"#$%11&'()*+,-./!01)234567895:;<=>"?@A0B$#/1.3!4CDE0F4@+GHIJHKL*)%(!0M%'

4&NOPQRSTLee*U8910:;<=>"?55A.VW!"#OPXRST0Y$#+Z[.\$37A]12.7C&0NOPK310A]18.2C&0RSTKL*)3NOPU _àbc+<de%$U8f+g@h!ij"?(!.,-"#$%22&'"k"MK*3lmn0op#OPXRST.qr"?,-Us0Mt38f+uvwx/yz{M$(!k*(+H@|EK}~{e%k��k0Y$#U�9+Z�K��{e%'

5&89+�� a&ZT456789+�mZ�!"#ZT.\p#$%,-U��)#$%17,22&'��{�rMZ�{e�3�@�IRST+��XT��@+��Q��0��MZ�{e%(!k*389�mZ�!"#ZTU ¡�)%'b&¢£¤Z�¥¦�M89+�m§¨qr+��©ª�«U¬"M$'® M,-.�%!89+¢£¤Z�+°±²{+��©ª�«!"#891:n0³´±\"3e!Uµ:1 !"#$%±²K¶$5-7,9,23-27&'"k"MK*3·¸+¹�º»�¼.½$?His*+,-{U35.9C+@A{U891:n0§¨qrK¾t�)#$Mkp?'896¿Àn0¢£¤Z�U91C+@A{±\�)#$?K3891:.>Á%!1/3+@A{U§¨��K\Â)#B*Ã3893:.>Á%!Ä069C+@A{§¨qrKM�)#$Mkp?28&'<Å"?Æ�0JH+g�.zÇ1%�È{¢£¤Z�Ug½MZ�{e%K3lm�0U$YÉ{\�ÊËk+yzMÌ¥UM$'c&ÍÎÏZ�His*+,-{U3ÍÎÏZ�U896¿À+n024C+@A{±\�)#$?+L{e�31:;ÐU10CÑÒ+±\Ó{ep?28&'<Å+Æ�0F4@+ÔÕQÖ×.ÇØ?90/jÂ*ÃuÙ4ÚÛKÜÝ1%@A/L*)%(!3¢£¤Z�{F4@K8fÆ�ÔÕ"#$%@A{UÞßàº�cKáâ1%(!UãMtJE+�ä�åæ.�1%çèUÉ){e%(!21&k*3¢£¤Z�{+F4@ÜÝKéÂ)%@A;�{U3ÍÎÏZ�U��{UM$10,25,29&'

45678]pyeloplasty&3êë]children&3.ì�í�î!"#PubMed{Zï"?849ðk*3ñòkYó�!ôÂ)%29ð+õö.÷½"?'

]øù úû&

! "1) Kis, E., Verebely, T., Kovi, R., et al : The role of ultra-sound in the follow-up of postoperative changes afterpyeloplasty. Pediatr. Radiol., 28, 247-249, 1998.

2) Park, K., Baek, M., Cho, S. Y., et al : Time course of hy-dronephrotic changes following unilateral pyeloplasty.J. Pediatr. Urol., 9, 779-789, 2013.

3) Amling, C. L., O"Hara, S. M., Wiener, J. S., et al : Renal

ultrasound changes after pyeloplasty in children withureteropelvic junction obstruction : long-term out-come in 47 renal units. J. Urol., 156, 2020-2024, 1996.

4) Sarhan, O., Helmy, T., Abou-El Ghar, M., et al : Long-term functional and morphological outcome afterpyeloplasty for huge renal pelvis. B. J. U. Int., 107, 829-833, 2011.

5) Blanc, T., Muller, C., Abdoul, H., et al : Retroperitoneallaparoscopic pyeloplasty in children : long-term out-come and critical analysis of 10-year experience in ateaching center. Eur. Urol., 63, 565-572, 2013.

6) Barbosa, J. A., Kowal, A., Onal, B., et al : Comparativeevaluation of the resolution of hydronephrosis in chil-dren who underwent open and robotic-assisted la-paroscopic pyeloplasty. J. Pediatr. Urol., 9, 199-205,2013.

7) Minnillo, B. J., Cruz, J. A., Sayao, R. H., et al : Long-term experience and outcomes of robotic assisted la-paroscopic pyeloplasty in children and young adults.J. Urol., 185, 1455-1460, 2011.

8) Ulman, I., Jayanthi, V. R., Koff, S. A. : The long-termfollowup of newborns with severe unilateral hy-dronephrosis initially treated nonoperatively. J. Urol.,164, 1101-1105, 2000.

9) Szavay, P. O., Luithle, T., Seitz, G., et al : Functionaloutcome after laparoscopic dismembered pyeloplastyin children. J. Pediatr. Urol., 6, 359-363, 2010.

10) Cost, N. G., Prieto, J. C., Wilcox, D. T. : Screening ultra-sound in follow-up after pediatric pyeloplasty. Urol-ogy, 76, 175-179, 2010.

11) Chertin, B., Pollack, A., Koulikov, D., et al : Does renalfunction remain stable after puberty in children withprenatal hydronephrosis and improved renal functionafter pyeloplasty? J. Urol., 182, 1845-1848, 2009.

12) Harraz, A. M., Helmy, T., Taha, D. E., et al : Changes indifferential renal function after pyeloplasty in chil-dren. J. Urol., 190, 1468-1473, 2013.

13) Matsumoto, F., Shimada, K., Kawagoe, M., et al : De-layed decrease in differential renal function after suc-cessful pyeloplasty in children with unilateral antena-tally detected hydronephrosis. Int. J. Urol., 14, 488-490,2007.

14) Calisti, A., Perrotta, M. L., Oriolo, L., et al : Functionaloutcome after pyeloplasty in children : impact of thecause of obstruction and of the mode of presentation.Eur. Urol., 43, 706-710, 2003.

15) Chipde, S. S., Lal, H., Gambhir, S., et al : Factors pre-dicting improvement of renal function after pyeloplastyin pediatric patients : a prospective study. J. Urol., 188,262-265, 2012.

16) Chandrasekharam, V. V., Srinivas, M., Bal, C. S., et al :Functional outcome after pyeloplasty for unilateralsymptomatic hydronephrosis. Pediatr. Surg. Int., 17,524-527, 2001.

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

40115

2!"#$%&'()*+,-. /

!"#$%&'()*!&$+,-./012345)67!8291:;<=>?@AB9C"DEF459GH"#$%&'IJ/#29%!KLM;NOP?@/Q$RST5C"/#29D;67!829!KU5)5VG

17) Shokeir, A. A., El-Sherbiny, M. T., Gad, H. M., et al :Postnatal unilateral pelviureteral junction obstruc-tion : impact of pyeloplasty and conservative manage-ment on renal function. Urology, 65, 980-985, 2005.

18) van den Hoek, J., de Jong, A., Scheepe, J., et al : Pro-longed follow-up after paediatric pyeloplasty : are re-peat scans necessary? B. J. U. Int., 100, 1150-1152, 2007.

19) Baek, M., Park, K., Choi, H. : Long-term outcomes ofdismembered pyeloplasty for midline-crossing gianthydronephrosis caused by ureteropelvic junction ob-struction in children. Urology, 76, 1463-1467, 2010.

20) Materny, J., Mazurkiewicz, I., Gawrych, E., et al : DoesHynes-Anderson pyeloplasty improve renal function?Ann. Acad. Med. Stetin., 56, 95-102, 2010.

21) Psooy, K., Pike, J. G., Leonard, M. P. : Long-term fol-lowup of pediatric dismembered pyeloplasty : howlong is long enough? J. Urol., 169, 1809-1812, 2003.

22) Lee, H. E., Park, K., Choi, H. : An analysis of long-termoccurrence of renal complications following pediatricpyeloplasty. J. Pediatr. Urol., 10, 1083-1088, 2014.

23) Zhou, H., Li, H., Zhang, X., et al : RetroperitoneoscopicAnderson-Hynes dismembered pyeloplasty in infantsand children : a 60-case report. Pediatr. Surg. Int., 25,519-523, 2009.

24) Valla, J. S., Breaud, J., Griffin, S. J., et al : Retroperi-toneoscopic vs open dismembered pyeloplasty forureteropelvic junction obstruction in children. J. Pedi-atr. Urol., 5, 368-373, 2009.

25) Braga, L. H., Lorenzo, A. J., Bagli, D. J., et al : Compari-son of flank, dorsal lumbotomy and laparoscopic ap-proaches for dismembered pyeloplasty in childrenolder than 3 years with ureteropelvic junction ob-struction. J. Urol., 183, 306-311, 2010.

26) van der Toorn, F., van den Hoek, J., Wolffenbuttel, K.P., et al : Laparoscopic transperitoneal pyeloplasty inchildren from age of 3 years : our clinical outcomescompared with open surgery. J. Pediatr. Urol., 9, 161-168, 2013.

27) Garcia-Aparicio, L., Blazquez-Gomez, E., Martin, O., etal : Anderson-hynes pyeloplasty in patients less than12 months old. Is the laparoscopic approach safe andfeasible? J. Endourol., 28, 906-908, 2014.

28) Hsi, R. S., Holt, S. K., Gore, J. L., et al : National Trendsin Followup Imaging after Pyeloplasty in Children inthe United States. J. Urol., 194, 777-782, 2015.

29) Almodhen, F., Jednak, R., Capolicchio, J. P., et al : Isroutine renography required after pyeloplasty? J.Urol., 184, 1128-1133, 2010.

WX<=>?@*YZ4[\';]^_#$%*àAb0)cdR1Gef'àg;hiAIJDjklm9noDLp1D;1990qArMH"#$%&LpsK$+,-./012345)tuvAwxRy9z,_D{lm11-4|G}g;]^_#$%*67~��%gA�Vs*��D��lm9D;b��5��v��'5)5|;wxi�K�q}�*K*D(V1:;�i~�A�Vs��A?�lm1K*'5VG

1|�IJ!*�i~�4C"��*%!�/�i�A�1MwxR1��'0�:s�

�msV9G33&'10q}�*wxDk�m13�d/�{29GIsmail�';��àlm1]^_#$%234!A�V

sg��v5� ¡¢��6|/kp1G��g;£!A¤¥¦§¨©/jkR$&ªC«k¬�® °ureteropel-vic junction obstruction : UPJO|*à*K4$+,*±²/kV³�13q�*~�/wxR1G´µ234!E;52!°22¶|D��g*�$+,-.*1:hiAIJ/·#4R1G~�wxDk�m1182!°78¶|&';45!D¸¹1.5q*~�&IJAºp1D;³»vA137!°59¶|4£

¼*½6¾DtuvAwxlm;�$+,''¿At1msV1GRÀR5D�;#$%grade4*Á(A�Vs��5?�'5lmsV5VGThomas�'fi*�$+,D40¶}�*]^_#$%76!A�Vs16q}�*wx/kV��R17|G#$%*!8L9V'ÂÃ5ÄÅ/Æ:1K*D40!°52¶|;#$%*Ç"'ÄÅR5)sK$+,DtÈlmsV9K*D8!°11¶|4;ÉÊ&'6¾}�*%!DtuvA~�wxlmsV1G³»vA'$+,-.;#$%*ËÌ;Â%Í/"ÎAIJAºp1K*'28!°37¶|&Lp1G1ÏR;ÐÑ*%!A´29ÒÓ5wxi��#$%*Ç"A�Vs'ÔÕ5Ö×D5VGChertin�8|';��àlm)*ªCØ+5Ù/ÚÛ

R1ÜÝ_UPJO*343!A�Vs;g��vA16q�*~�/wxR1G´µ*ÞßH"#$%*¾ÉD59.6¶/à:91:À;áâvhVãä&179!°52.2¶|4å�}�AIJDjklmsV9Gæ�'IJjkçi/?�R;2èé&A50¶;êM*%!K2!/ÚVs'4èé&AIJDk�msV134/ëì;~�wxi�4Rséí4q�DT#&L94îï1Þð&;³f*2q�'3!6ñòóAwx;<=>?@&*ôõö��$+,*ËÌD5÷møù*2

úX]^_#$%°$&ªC«k¬�®¯| ,Iû0 2016üýþ�i~�4C"

41116

!!"6#$%!&'(")*+,#-./0*1

22$34%%grade&567&%89:(";7<%'(=>?/)@ABC*D:"EF*GH/0*1IJKLMN%;7<%+O="Society for Fetal UrologyPSFU2,-A.0GH*D:A/0QR3,9250,-=>*grade&=)@,S1.Q2T,-)A50UHV89WXL!A3F54L89,-)V%'"C01a2565Y(;7<PSFU grade 15grade 22D%Z'"7[8=9:,JU*\] ";03,1021Sidhu

G=>*25<_%`]abacd efgh112'"5ijkl=>mY(;7<Pgrade 1!22'Yn5o=5p>q)*<%"98r=s*D:A-tH/um5vwgrade 1'"100r'x?Q1grade 2=y./V100r:)*2TVxm12,1325?z.34A@A:C*%"{H'x*1grade 2=|0/2257,WX.Q2T'"3%P1.3r2=grade%?zA}GHQA534,A.Q%"grade 4~�?Q1%%}'x?Q1421D%Z'"�:��%<%A9:CF89)*D:�GB�CS�A("%D�:C*1021b2565DE(;7<PSFU grade 25grade 32D%Z=,-tH*;7<'"+OAF.0:%��Vx*A325)@"@U.VGH'"C0:)*2TA��tH*1Q:��556grade 3%33<%,�I�8=JKe��c'WX.Q:D�5L�4.5!!=7%P21r2'34A��tHQV%%5��8="M%'7�NAO�tH/0Q:%2T152Ax*1{Q5grade 2!3%30%=P.�I�8=2.5!!%WX,�?QS1'"5Q�.Q1%,�FM%'34=�*D:CF,7�NAO�tH/0Q:2TtH/0*1621DHG2T'"5B�CS�:��S�,R}� ¡/(")¢£:./0*AS�%!&¤¥L=|0/"¦§./0C015,1621SFU consensus statement'"5grade 3=P./"JKe��c �,©ª=.CAGB�CS�=>*�«¬h,�05BA® H*¯�"e��c°S¤S%±T²U,V³)*>v ¢GH/0*321c2565µ(;7<PSFU grade 35grade 421992!=KoffG162"56;7<45%%89,�I�8=

WX.2T.Q1P¶%vwgrade 4=,-tH*µ(;7<"15%'x?QA5·J@%JKe��c'W¸¹jhº,-.5,7�NAL�25r:;»./0Q=Vy GU52.5!:0v30L!'%WX'"5M%A7�N;»CF89.Q1DH=>m5IJKL%µ(;7<'"[email protected]@A:"0�C0¼N½A-tHQ1¾0'YG"51994!=�I�8C5!!%WX¿À,2

T.Q221Z[K(Á\%�],^>.Q104%%Â_½;7<,599mTc-DTPAPtechnetium- 99m diethylenetiaminepentaacetid acid2ºÃ��cPDTPA ºÃ2=>*+O',7�NA40rMÄZ88%:40ràZ16%=,Å/89,S1.Q1@Æ'"M%Agrade 4%;7<,-./0QA516%D15%AOb8WX=/,7�NAL�26r�G48r~:o=.534,@A:.Q%"1%%}'x?Q1D%2TV{Q5µ(;7<'5�|ÇL=7�NAGH'x?/V5Ob8=WX'£*¼N½,-.Q1È%@5µ(;7<,P¶=5ÉÊcCAGV�ºËÌq

dÍÎÏ%¿ÀA2TtHQ1721PalmerG"5grade 3!4%;7<,e.,7�N40rMÄ%IJK32%,5�ºËÌ=89WXZ16%:34Z16%%2Z=,Å53!!%WX,�?Q134Z'"Ðm,Åf@=7gÑÒ4,�05È%@6#$515253!@%89,B�CS�5e��c¨�=/+O.Q1<%ÓAÔCF5hÕ�8Ce�Ö"-tH/0C0A534Z"M%'7�NAO�tH/0Q1×I589WXZ'V7gØiA�j./0*=Vy GU,7�N"OQH/0*<%A/F534,A.Q<%"25r'x?Q1UlmanG182"5Â_½;7<:·J�²UtHQ104%=

|0/�I�8=L�6.5!%WX,�?Q1P¶"grade 3!4%µ(;7<'xm5M%'Z[K(Á\A^>tH5JKe��c=/UPJO:²UtH/0*1vw34,@A:.Q%"23%P22r2%}'5Ùm%78rAOb8=89WXtHQ189WX:C?Q<%%7Ú"5L�1.6!';7<Agrade 0C0.grade 1~:ÛkYn.5Ùm%3ÚV2.5!%vw="grade 2{Q"grade 3~:o=,lRQ1ÇL=,7�NA40rà'x?Q<%'V5L�1.5!'47r=Äs.Q1D%>v=5µ(;7<'x?/V7�N;»,£Q)D:CFÛkYn)*¼N½AÜ./;F"C0D:A-ÝtH*A5��8="34,A)*<%AÔCFC0%VD%Z'x*QR5ÞßC89WXA@A:tH925B�CS�5��S�=V:à0/("A� H*1021SFU consensusstatement=>H�grade 4'"34=�*¼N½Aµ0D:�G5B�CS�%��5��S�¤S%±T²U%��,áâ.54L8C89WXA@A'x*:ãmtH/0*A5È%näCS�!&¤WXL!=y)*�I�8Cåæ"CFçotH/0C032:./0*1d2p6;7<p6;7<'"5,7�N%+OAèF'x*D:Vx

m5)@=|0/%2T"ÔC01021OnenG192G"·J�²UtHQp6;7<19%%IJK

=uÅ*Õ387=|0/L�4.5!%89,WX.Q1M%Agrade 3!4%µ(;7<'x?QA534=�?Q%"137Pp64%87556572'xm5Ùm%257"Ob8=WXtH5vw217"grade 2M»=Yn.Q1×I5·J�²UtHQÂ_½7KqéÑ822<%=|

0/%7)@%S1'"p6%;7<Ar½7stu<%)vêë:C*:%2T202V}GH*1("="56;7<:0w=B�CS�5��S�A.0GH*A5,7�N%+OAF.0D:Vxm5Kìeíhî%+OPe��c'%W¸¹jhº2Vªx.QÞßC89WX:ïð=ñòQIó%yôA@A:C*1{Q5<%=>?/"zK¥Z[K{|õV��.»}Kq,öRQ÷�A@A:C*¯�Vx*1021

32·J�²UtHQ;7<5$34%%89:("~KB�CS�=/·J�=²UtH*;7<"57g�@øPanterior-posterior diameter : APD2'+OtH*D:A/01LeeG"�ù�2ú�LP14û!27û2x*0"�3ú�LP28û!2'BC*APDØi%üý�,þ>.5Y(5DE(5µ(=,ÅQÄ'ijkl,�05µ(=C*

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

42117

!"#$%&'!"()*#+,$-./01*234/,2156Alconcher22578%9:3;&<&APD 5!15mm=>?

*'@A#$BC'D98(EF196'*GH134%)IJ&KL3E1MNO&80P-QRST3A1*U34/,6Tombesi2357V+,=WXY%9:3;&<EAPD 5!15mm5&4193(=Z$[Y-\84(E.\109(5*GH&F277'&]/4B)IJ&KL3E1/^0&73P-QRSTE_`&abA=82(=cOdbA01**U3A60e7*UO8E/feV#$%1E3E6E12ghOij1kl*m/EAPD-2n2oO5mm^p1q,01*r'Est-uv+,wx8yz{kl*m|01-2}e4/,22,2356Longpre72458E%)IJqk3&~/4E110(Y118'5=#$BC'D=|�E4�2.8/=KL&4ST3AD(-5&�=53(Y62'5OdbA01**U3E.�=APD>?-_`�6=7��134�8Od,1��34/,YQRST�4�9.4mmE_`�4�29.0mm56APD>?-10!15mm^�1.�&q,1_`&a,��-��+,1=*U-�q�q/25-275A@Ede Kort78APD-10mm^�=D(O8ij1kl1yz{kl*9:3��34;�+��Od,1��34/,2656Coelho78E192(=#$BC'D&G3B)IJq��*mbA6'<�&� S�Y5!9.9mm589(E¡¢�Y10!14.9mm560(E.�Y15.0mm^�543(&=£#$%&B)IJKL*mbA10¤ES�O8¥(O>¦J&§¨KL-©?Od E¡¢�O83(Y5P5=c_`*ª£A-E.�O824(Y56P51&�^�-_`&abA01«7EAPD15.0mm*¬�® °1+e±_`�6=©?²-7³O�,1 �4/,2756µ)OAPD>?-.�Odb4V>¦J&§¨KLO�

,D(-�q�q/01*2¶+,*UVd,6APD-15mm^�O'@=>?V'@,-\²C'D=|�EDTPA·¹O='º?40P^�-r'O�A75(*E_`�39(1§¨KL�36(&=£» ¼½vA¾¿À*mbAk3285O8E#$%5/Á&_`�O8¥(O'º?->Â}e4/A-E§¨KL�Odb4V8Ã^�=D(->¦J&KL}eE§¨¡&'º?Äp&� _`*83A7(Y19P5&]/4V1(*Å/4`%&'º?=nB*'@A134/,6

45C_`(= ÆÇ�<ÁÈ<§¨&~£,ÉÊË¸�-D3/01� ESTEÌÍEÎÏv(&G+,ÐÑq§¨KL<ÁÒ ÆÇ�ÓEÔ<&]/4Fr&23A*U8q/356_`&a,D(=!1Õ"-4M^pOd,1+,*U85-d,µ)OEÖ×ØÙ&�,C'D8#$Bij1klO8st-S�Od ENAEµÔJ&ST34V5!9/=§¨*§4«7�u+,01-d,2951=��-d,6GDÚOdb4V§¨KL8Ûo+��1/|�t305Vd,-EQRST%=Ü�u*k33A*U315&�e±E/bAÕST3AD(O8È< ÆÇ�ÝÞ8H813q-7VE�uÔ&8¥(OIßÒJàEKáJØ!1/bADâ*ã3A01«7E ÆÇ�ÓE%&Dâ-Lä3Awx8Ük

l*ª£,�|åF34~�M8-d,134/,6

æç²C'DYcongenital hydronephrosis5E#$BC'DYantenatal hydronephrosis5E#$%Ypostnatal5E§Ycourse5E7%Youtcome5*è�é�ê&Pub MedOkë3A691N«7EÐÑ«]�81ìíe,Oî~�ïSFUconsensus statement*ðñ&31N*ò:3A6

Yóô õö5

! "1) Madden, N. P., Thomas, D. F. M., Gordon, A. C., et al :Antenatally detected pelviureteric junction obstruc-tion. Is non-operation safe? Br. J. Urol., 68, 305-310,1991.

2) Koff, S. A., Campbell, K. D. : The nonoperative man-agement of unilateral neonatal hydronephrosis : Natu-ral history of poorly functioning kidneys. J. Urol., 152,593-595, 1994.

3) Nguyen, H. T., Herndon, C. D. A., Cooper, C., et al :The society for Fetal Urology consensus statement onthe evaluation and management of antenatal hy-dronephrosis. J. Pediatr. Urol., 6, 212-231, 2010.

4) Mallik, M., Watson, A. R. : Antenatally detected uri-nary tract abnormalities : more detection but less ac-tion. Pediatr. Nephrol., 23, 897-904, 2008.

5) Barbasa, J. A. B. A., Chow, J. S., Benson, C. B., et al :Postnatal longitudinal evaluation of children diag-nosed with prenatal hydronephrosis : insights in natu-ral history and referral pattern. Prenatal. Diagn., 32,1242-1249, 2012.

6) Ismail, A., Elkholy, A., Zaghmout, O., et al : Postnatalmanagement of antenatally diagnosed ureteropelvicjunction obstruction. J. Pediatr. Urol., 2, 163-168, 2006.

7) Thomas, D. F. M. : Prenatal diagnosis : What do weknow of long-term outcome? J. Pediatr. Urol., 6, 204-211, 2010.

8) Chertin, B., Pollack, A., Koulikov, D., et al : Conserva-tive treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstructionin children with antenatal diagnosis of hydronephro-sis : Lessons learned after 16 years of follow-up. Eur.Urol., 49, 734-738, 2006.


10) Vemulakonda, V., Yiee, J., Wilcox, D. T. : Prenatal hy-dronephrosis : Postnatal evaluation and management.Curr. Urol. Rep., 15, 430, 2014.

11) Sidhu, G., Beyene, J., Rosenblum, N. D. : Outcome ofisolated antenatal hydronephrosis : a systematic re-view and meta-analysis. Pediatr. Nephrol., 21, 218-224,2006.

12) Rodriguez, L. V., Lock, J., Kennedy, W. A., et al : Evalu-ation of sonographic renal parenchymal area in themanagement of hydronephrosis. J. Urol., 165, 548-551,

ó[æç²C'DY'<!Ù÷mPø¨ùú5ûQ_ò� 2016üýþÈ<§ 1ÙR

43118

2001.13) Karnak, I., Woo, L. L., Shah, S. N., et al : Results of apractical protocol for management of prenatally de-tected hydronephrosis due to ureteropelvic junctionobstruction. Pediatr. Surg. Int., 25, 61-67, 2009.


15) Erickson, B. A., Maizels, M., Shore, R. M., et al : New-born society of fetal urology grade 3 hydronephrosisis equivalent to preserved percentage differentialfunction. J. Pediatr. Urol., 3, 382-386, 2007.

16) Koff, S. A., Campbell, K. D. : Nonoperative manage-ment of unilateral neonatal hydronephrosis. J. Urol.,148, 525-531, 1992.

17) Palmer, L. S., Maizels, M., Cartwright, P. C., et al : Sur-gery versus observation for managing obstructivegrade 3 to 4 unilateral hydronephrosis : A report fromthe society for fetal urology. J. Urol., 159, 222-228, 1998.

18) Ulman, I., Jayanthi, V. R., Koff, S. A. : The long-termfollow up of newborns with severe unilateral hy-dronephrosis initially treated nonoperatively. J. Urol.,164, 1101-1105, 2000.

19) Onen, A., Jayanthi, V. R., Koff, S. A. : Long-term fol-lowup of prenatally detected severe bilateral new-born hydronephrosis initially managed nonopera-tively. J. Urol., 168, 1118-1120, 2002.

20) Quirino, I. G., Dias, C. S., Vasconcelos, M. A., et al : Apredictive model of chronic kidney disease in patientswith congenital anomalies of kidney and urinary tract.Pediatr. Nephrol., 29, 2357-2364, 2014.

21) Lee, R. S., Cendron, M., Kinnamon, D. D., et al : Antena-tal hydronephrosis as a predictor of postnatal out-come : a meta-analysis. Pediatrics, 118, 586-593, 2006.

22) Anconcher, L. F., Thombesi, M. M. : Natural history ofbilateral mild isolated antenatal hydronephrosis con-servatively managed. Pediatr. Nephrol., 27, 1119-1123,2012.

23) Tombesi, M. M., Anconcher, L. F. : Short-term out-come of mild isolated antenatal hydronephrosis con-servatively managed. J. Pediatr. Urol., 8, 129-133, 2012.

24) Longpre, M., Nguan. A., Macneily, A. E., et al : Predic-tion of the outcome of antenatally diagnosed hy-dronephrosis : a multivariable analysis. J. Pediatr.Urol., 8, 135-139, 2012.

25) Policiano, C., Djokovic, D., Carvalho, R., et al : Ultra-sound antenatal detection of urinary tract anomaliesin the last decade : outcome and prognosis. J. Matern.Fetal. Neonatal. Med., 17, 1-5, 2014.

26) de Kort, E. H., Bambang, O. S., Zegers, S. H. : The long-term outcome of antenatal hydronephrosis up to 15millimetres justifies a noninvasive postnatal follow-up.Acta. Paediatr., 97, 708-713, 2008.

27) Coelho, G. M., Bouzada, M. C., Pereira, A. K., et al : Out-come of isolated antenatal hydronephrosis : a prospec-tive cohort study. Pediatr. Nephrol., 22, 1727-1734,2007.

28) Dhillon, H. K. : Prenatally diagnosed hydronephrosis :the Great Ormond Street experience. Br. J. Urol., 81,39-44, 1998.

29) Rigas, A., Karamanolakis, D., Bogdanos, I., et al : Pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction by crossing renal ves-sels : clinical and imaging features. B. J. U. Int., 92, 101-103, 2003.

30) Gatti, J. M., Broecker, B. H., Scherz, C., et al : Antenatalhydronephrosis with postnatal resolution : how longare postnatal studies warranted? Urology, 57, 1178,2001.

31) Matsui, F., Shimada, K., Matsumoto, F., et al : Late re-currence of symptomatic hydronephrosis in patientswith prenatally detected hydronephrosis and sponta-neous improvement. J. Urol., 180, 322-325, 2008.

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

44119

!"#$

%&!'()*+',-./01&2345&6"&27#8$9:;<=%>?@ABC,&'/-.0D+(3+)#E

*FG'+#HA#I,JK7L@MJH,NO,PPQRSTN#8$9:UV7WX9:/,-NYZ/,-N[\I0]^_

X abcdefghbiJ.jkABl.m/"nop/?@nqr0Dst/N01\2uNO,vI,JK\^3#,-NO,w,

x4/N[\I\I05yz{7|6F\# }7o~$�FCK\q7?�oH �F�AB�;G.�5LA0!AH/�5FGMXr

,��H�#w;!r08=;!AB9�n08:0]^_3l.m7�Fn�;!A�3iFn$G,��KX"�6,<�i�

kn$GB

O,'0<=%&>?��Z��b�f,��@\lAB7Jr0D%&vC)*+'�+(?��DER��

�3Y $ 2016[#¡F?@GB0GL¢$/0<=%&>?��,£¤,0H�¥¦�;!A>?��_0%&V�_0

%&�_X \A�b�f§¨;=�3Y $#©¨?@GI;!ABª�,«¬®f #C@°@,J±KLiK²F0��

,Q³,¦\ ´Rµ,MNi¶OK7·PFGK ;=�3Y $#¹G?@GB��Q;,ºR\»MiQG¼7=�3Y

$½#%F?@0®¾¿ÀÁa�b iJG¼7ÂÃÀgÄÅÀÆ?@0? 7S$#XX�GBQT/0KXrÇH�3ÅdÈ¿ÉÊ7

ËPr0UÌ6KV62Í0Î�0�W0^30X2QR"�Y0CFnZÏ"�HnHAB]^_3l.mX`,|6Ðni

[\Fnqr0P?7Ñ],�3Y $;!ABÒ?P,}<X ,�37^_Óo,"ÔÕFnqr0PGCK\@M"Ö�nHAB

}×/0D�3Y $ 2016["HKØ;¡F?@G#0}¼/0O,�3Y $,Ù8)i9ÚF0? 7Jr Ho,7FnH.O

"#<=%&>?��,Û-\Üa�"Ý¸nHAB

£¼70=�3Y $,¡F7ÞAÆßà,\X;áwbâ,ãci?@Gdeäfv5�åæ�0dv5X ,gH«fd7

3kIF\# o¿fçfgÀÆi%è?@�kGéLhê��X0ëi\Áfdçìb;Ðíijî?@Gïkðêv50lr¥H

©ñi�knO @G©¨��6òB��,v5:0CFn=�3Y $,©¨7lóm6lnoiô�GÐn,:�7pJrq

põFö÷AB

q¨28røK

sùúw_�¤� +û%&� tD üý

%&vC)*+'�+(?��DER��3Y $ 2016þ!"#$

45120

! "

! "#$%&'()*+,-./012345678

J.J.P.U. Vol.25, No.2, 2016

46121

Documents

日本小児泌尿器科学会 Japanese Society of Pediatric Urology# $ * +, -. /01234 5672! " # $ 58 9: ;? 562 5@ AB C@DE123414F GHI24JK LM NO PQRST>? 5672UVWXYZO1234