Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 22 March 2016
- Published on: 22 March 2016
- Published on: 22 March 2016Borderline antenatal dilation of renal pelvis: not so benign after all?Show More
Dear Editor,
I read plant et al’s short report ‘Does antenatal pelvic dilation predict renal scarring’ with interest.[1] They conclude that moderate renal pelvic dilation of 5-15 mm is not a marker for increased risk of urine infection or renal scarring, and suggest that it is inappropriate to perform cystograms on these babies.
I want to bring to their attention 2 recent cases that we dealt with – bot...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 22 March 2016Postnatal ultrasound - a minimum requirement for moderate antenatal renal pelvic dilatationShow More
Dear Editor,
I read with interest the report by Plant et al.[1] , in which it is suggested that children with antenatal renal pelvic diameter of 5-15 mm do not require postnatal investigations or treatment as their rate of renal scarring with DMSA after the age of 4 years (1/189 children) was 0.5% (95% confidence interval 0 to 2.9) for both sexes combined. It is not clear however if their results represent antenatal...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.