Objective: The purpose of this prospective study was to identify possible causes of unsuccessful treatment of vesicoureteric reflux (VUR) in children by endoscopic collagen injection. Patients and Methods: Between February 1994 and September 1996, 130 primary VURs in 94 children aged 3–16 years were treated by endoscopic injection of collagen. Grade 2 VUR was found in 46 ureteric units, grade 3 in 55, and grade 4 in 11 ureteric units. Seventy-seven children had normal micturition, and 17 showed signs of an unstable bladder. The collagen injection was performed under general anasthesia. All children had a follow-up assessment on average 5.1 months after the first injection of collagen. They were evaluated by micturition cystography and ultrasound examination of the urinary tract. Results: A single injection of collagen eliminated VUR in 74 (56.9%) cases. There was a statistically significant correlation between the grade of VUR and the success rate of collagen therapy (p < 0.01). The average amount of collagen used in cured and in noncured children was 0.55 and 0.76 ml, respectively (p < 0.01). Children with normal appearance of the ureteric orifice had significantly better results as compared with other children (p < 0.01). There was no statistically significant correlation between the success rate of treatment and the place of collagen injection or the shape of ureteric orifice following the injection. A statistically significant association, however, was found between the function of the lower urinary tract and the results of endoscopic collagen treatment for VUR (p < 0.05). Ultrasound showed no obstruction of the upper urinary tract. Conclusion: High-grade VUR, incorrect technique of injection, and voiding dysfunction seem to be some of the possible causes of an unsuccessful endoscopic collagen treatment of VUR in children.

Keywords:
Vesicoureteric reflux, Collagen injection
1.
Gibbons MD, Gonazles TE: Complications of antireflux surgery. Urol Clin North Am 1983;10:489–501.
2.
O’Donnell B, Puri P: Treatment of vesicoutereric reflux by endoscopic injection of Teflon. Br Med J 1984;289:7–9.
3.
Eickenberg HV, Gellhaar G, Rugert R: Antirefluxplastik mittels endoskopischer Kollageninjektion. Kongressband der 40. Tagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Urologie, Berlin 1988.
4.
Lipsky H: Endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteric reflux with bovine collagen. Eur Urol 1990;18:52–55.
5.
Schulman CC: Macroplastique: A new uro-implant for the endoscopic correction of reflux. Proc. 2nd Int Congr of Endoscopic Paediatric Urology, Basel 1993, p 12.
6.
Azmy A: Clinical experience with uroplastic for correction of vesicoureteric reflux in children. Proc. 2nd Int Congr of Endoscopic Paediatric Urology, Basel 1993, p 13.
7.
Chancellor MB, Rivas DA, Liberman SN, Moore JJ, Staas WE: Cystoscopic autogenous fat injection treatment of vesicoureteral reflux in spinal cord injury. J Am Paraplegia Soc 1994;17:50–54.
8.
Atala A: Endoscopic treatment of reflux with autologous chondrocytes. Br J Urol 1997;80:299.
9.
Dodat H, Takvorial P, Mure PY, Canterino I, Pouillaude JM: Analysis of the failure of endoscopic treatment of vesicorenal reflux in children using injections of Teflon and collagen and the preliminary results of injections of Macroplastic. Prog Urol 1995;5:58–68.
10.
International Reflux Study Committee: Medical versus surgical treatment of primary versico-ureteric reflux: Prospective international reflux study in children. J Urol 1981;125:277–289.
11.
Bloom AD, Seeley WW, Ritchey LM, McGuire JE: Toilet habits and continence in children: An opportunity sampling in search of normal parameters. J Urol 1993;149:1087–1090.
12.
Lyon RP, Marshall S, Tanagho E: The ureteral orifice: Its configuration and competency. J Urol 1969;102:504.
13.
Capozza N, Caione P, De Gennaro M, Nappo S, Patricolo M: Endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteric reflux and urinary incontinence: Technical problems in paediatric patients. Br J Urol 1995;75:538–542.
14.
Tršinar B: Endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteric reflux in children. Zdrav Vestn 1994;63:305–309.
15.
Latal D, Schroth B, Marberger M: Endoscopic treatment of reflux. Proc. 2nd Int Congr Endoscopic Paediatric Urology, Basel 1993, p 27.
16.
Lipsky H, Wurnschimmel E: Five years experience with endoscopic collagen injection in the treatment of VUR in children. Proc. 2nd Int Congr of Endoscopic Paediatric Urology, Basel 1993, p 20.
17.
Burst M, Rosch W, Schrott G, Schrott KM: Endoscopic treatment of vesicorenal reflux. Proc. 2nd Int Congr Endoscopic Paediatric Urology, Basel 1993, p 29.
18.
Horcher E, Geissler W: Three years experience with subureteric collagen injection for treatment of vesicoureteric reflux in children. Proc. 2nd Int Congr Endoscopic Paediatric Urology, Basel 1993, p 21.
19.
Frey P, Lutz N, Jenny P, Herzog B: Endoscopic subureteral collagen injection for the treatment of vesicoureteral reflux in infants and children. J Urol 1995;154:804–807.
20.
Cendron M, Leonard MP, Gearhart JP: Endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteral reflux using cross-linked bovine dermal collagen. Pediatr Surg Int 1991;6:295–300.
21.
Dewan PA, Higgs MJ: Correlation of the endoscopic appearance with clinical outcome for submucous Polytef paste injection in vesicoureteric reflux. Aust NZ J Surg 1995;65:642–644.
22.
Vereecken RL, Proesmans W: Results of endoscopic treatment for vesicoureteric reflux. Eur Urol 1995;27:76–79.
23.
Frey P, Gudinchet F, Jenny P: GAX 65: New injectable cross-linked collagen for the endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteral reflux – a double-blind study evaluating its efficiency in children. J Urol 1997;158:1210–1212.
24.
Gudinchet F, Oberson JC, Frey P: Color Doppler ultrasound for evaluation of collagen implants after endoscopic injection treatment of refluxing ureters in children. J Clin Ultrasound 1997;25:201–206.
© 1999 S. Karger AG, Basel
1999
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.