New Criteria for Renal Scintigraphy After Urinary Tract Infection: Are those Adequate?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71749/pkj.22Keywords:
Child, Radionuclide Imaging, Technetium Tc 99m Dimercaptosuccinic Acid, Urinary Tract Infections/complications, Urinary Tract Infections/diagnostic imagingAbstract
Introduction: Criteria for imagiological studies following urinary tract infections (UTI) are frequently updated, including for renal scintigraphy with dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA), the gold standard method for renal scars detection. Until 2020, in the authors’ hospital, every patient with febrile UTI underwent follow‐up scintigraphy. This study aims to analyze the results of post‐UTI DMSA scintigraphy based on current performance criteria, which are atypical UTI below three years old, recurrent UTI and altered renal and bladder ultrasound (RBUS).Methods: Retrospective analysis of patients under 16 years of age who underwent post‐UTI DMSA scintigraphy between 2011 and 2020. Demographical, clinical, analytical and imagiological data were collected.
Results: Of the 231 patients considered, 60% were female, and the median age was 14 months. Escherichia coli was the most commonly identified bacteria. Atypical UTI under three years old occurred in 28 patients (12%), recurrent UTI in 50 (22%) and RBUS abnormalities in 18 (7%). Altered DMSA scintigraphy was identified in 39 patients (17%), with these alterations correlating with the new criteria (odds ratio 2.7 (1.3‐5.4)). Altered DMSA scintigraphy was more frequent in patients with recurrent UTI or altered RBUS, but not with atypical UTI under three years old. Alterations in DMSA scintigraphy were found in 18 patients who did not meet new criteria (12%).
Conclusion: The new criteria are associated with a higher incidence of altered DMSA scintigraphy but also lead to unidentified alterations. Follow‐up studies are necessary to understand the clinical consequences for patients who, under the new criteria, would not undergo DMSA scintigraphy.
Downloads
References
Millner R, Becknell B. Urinary Tract Infections. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2019;66:1‐13. doi: 10.1016/j.pcl.2018.08.002.
Shabani Y, Sadeghi H, Yousefichaijan P, Shabani D, Rafiee F. Prev‐ alence of Risk Factors of Urinary Tract Infections in Infants and Children in Arak, Iran: A Cross‐sectional Study. Nephro‐Urol Mon. 2023;15:e131333. doi: 10.5812/numonthly‐131333.
Tullus K, Shaikh N. Urinary tract infections in children. Lancet. 2020 May 23;395:1659‐68. doi: 10.1016/S0140‐6736(20)30676‐0.
Okarska‐Napierała M, Wasilewska A, Kuchar E. Urinary tract infec‐ tion in children: Diagnosis, treatment, imaging – Comparison of current guidelines. J Pediatr Urol. 2017;13:567‐73. doi: 10.1016/j. jpurol.2017.07.018.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, NICE. Urinary tract infection in under 16s: diagnosis and management. NICE [Internet]. 2022. [accessed 2022 Oct 10]. Available from: http://www.nice.org. uk/guidance/ng224.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, NICE. Urinary tract infection in under 16s: diagnosis and management. Nice [Internet]. 2018. [accessed 2021 Dec 10]. Available from: http:// www.nice.org. uk/guidance/cg54.
Ammenti A, Cataldi L, Chimenz R, Fanos V, La Manna A, Marra G, et al. Febrile urinary tract infections in young children: Recommen‐ dations for the diagnosis, treatment and follow‐up. Acta Paediatr. 2012;101:451‐7. doi: 10.1111/j.1651‐2227.2011.02549.x.
Ammenti A, Alberici I, Brugnara M, Chimenz R, Guarino S, La Man‐ na A, et al. Italian Society of Pediatric Nephrology. Updated Italian recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment and follow‐up of the first febrile urinary tract infection in young children. Acta Paediatr. 2020;109:236‐47. doi: 10.1111/apa.14988.
Shaikh N, Craig JC, Rovers MM, Da Dalt L, Gardikis S, Hoberman A, et al. Identification of children and adolescents at risk for renal scarring after a first urinary tract infection: A meta‐analysis with indi‐ vidual patient data. JAMA Pediatr. 2014;168:893‐900. doi: 10.1001/ jamapediatrics.2014.637.
Donoso RG, Lobo SG, Arnello VF, Arteaga VM, Coll CC, Hevia JP, et al. Cicatriz renal detectada mediante cintigrama renal DMSA en niños con primera pielonefritis aguda: Estudio de factores de riesgo. Rev Med Chil. 2006;134:305–11. doi: 10.4067/S0034‐98872006000300006.
Miranda A, Garcia C, Bento V, Pinto S. Urinary tract infections under 24 months old: Is it possible to predict the risk of renal scarring? Port J Nephrol Hypert 2017; 31: 108‐14.
Rodríguez Azor B, Ramos Fernández JM, Sánchiz Cárdenas S, Cordón Martínez A, Carazo Gallego B, Moreno‐Pérez D, et al. Cicatrices renales en menores de 36 meses ingresados por pielonefritis aguda. An Pediatr. 2017;86:76–80. doi: 10.1016/j.anpedi.2016.03.002.
Breinbjerg A, Jørgensen CS, Frøkiær J, Tullus K, Kamperis K, Rittig S. Risk factors for kidney scarring and vesicoureteral reflux in 421 chil‐ dren after their first acute pyelonephritis, and appraisal of interna‐ tional guidelines. Pediatr Nephrol. 2021;36:2777‐87. doi: 10.1007/s00467‐021‐05042‐7.
Kosmeri C, Kalaitzidis R, Siomou E. An update on renal scarring after urinary tract infection in children: what are the risk factors? J Pediatr Urol. 2019;15:598‐603. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2019.09.010.
Park YS. Renal scar formation after urinary tract infection in children. Korean J Pediatr. 2012;55:367‐70. doi: 10.3345/kjp.2012.55.10.367.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Marta Alexandra Martins de Carvalho, Teresa Alexandra Almeida Lopes, Mariana Flórido Santos, Filipa Inês Cunha, Catarina Isabel Madeira Rodrigues Neves (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
