Functional outcome of pyeloplasty is a matter of debate, since the pyeloplasty was first performed by Trendelenburg, in 1886 (
16). Various studies have attempted to determine the functional outcome, with conflicting results. The clinician, as well as patient and parents, want to know the benefit of pyeloplasty in terms of recoverability of renal function and salvageability of kidney. One way to know it is by staging this treatment-putting stent or performing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCN) before definitive surgery and comparing results of radionuclide studies, done before and after diversion (
17). However, this method is time consuming, with the attendant risk of stent dislodgement and infection. In this scenario, histopathological changes, occurring in renal parenchyma secondary to UPJO, might be useful in predicting the outcome of pyeloplasty in terms of renal function recoverability. Bhat et al. in their study, found that postoperative improvement in DRF is increased when the renal biopsy is suggestive of normal histology (
18). Ortapamuk et al. have used the preoperative split renal function as the predicting factor for the outcome of adult pyeloplasty. According to them, the renal units with split renal function < 30% had very little chance of improvement after pyeloplasty (
19). This study, however, showed that ORUs with no or minimal histopathological changes (grade I) had significant renal functional recoverability after 12 months of pyeloplasty. On the other hand, kidneys with significant changes (grade II and III) had minimal improvement in DRF, which was clinically insignificant (P > 0.05). It was also found that a significant improvement is more likely in those with initial renal function > 35%, (P < 0.05). Although pyeloplasty is not very useful in kidneys having DRF < 35% or with significant histopathological changes in term of functional outcome, it is still important for relief of pain and to prevent complications, such as infection and urolithiasis.
One limitation of this study is that the functional recoverability has not been correlated with the age at which the operations were performed. Studies have shown that the pediatric age group has a superior functional recovery than adult patients, with similar preoperative DRF. Wagner M et al. in a retrospective study, have shown that the kidney is still salvageable in children with split function of even less than 10% (
20). Therefore, the progressiveness with age or static evolution of renal parenchymal injury in cases of UPJO is still a matter of debate (
21,
22).
Histopathological evaluation of renal parenchyma may be useful to provide an objective method of predicting the recovery of renal function after pyeloplasty. It would allow the comparison of the types of histological alteration, with the changes in DRF, in order to predict the final improvement potential of the affected renal unit, after successful corrective surgery. In the presence of severe pathological changes in renal biopsy, recoverability of renal function, despite anatomical success, in term of drainage, is significantly decreased. Patients having grade 1 histopathological changes have a high probability of improvement in DRF compared with those with grade 2 or grade 3 changes. The ORUs with DRF > 35% usually have minimal changes in renal biopsy and can be expected to get better functional recoverability. However, the DRF estimated on DTPA scan may be fallacious, particularly in grossly dilated renal pelvis and pyeloplasty, and should not be deferred when preservation of renal function is of concern. In this situation, renal biopsy may be useful, although it has certain disadvantages. First, image guided renal biopsy is an invasive procedure with risk of bleeding and infection, etc. Secondly, the histopathological changes may be heterogeneous and the biopsy from a small area may not be sufficient to provide an accurate histological estimate of the injury, sustained by the renal parenchyma, due to obstruction per se. It, therefore, needs further long term studies in a larger series of patients, in order to clearly define which kidneys are at risk for deterioration and to predict the improvement potential of affected kidneys.