Nefrología Vol. 36 Issue 3 Year 2016
Nefrologia (English Version) 2016;36:222-31 | doi: 10.1016/j.nefroe.2016.06.007

Usefulness of basic renal function tests in decision-making in children with loss of renal parenchyma and/or dilation of the urinary tract

Utilidad de las pruebas básicas de estudio de la función renal en la toma de decisiones en niños con pérdida de parénquima renal o dilatación de la vía urinaria


a Sección de Nefrología Pediátrica, Hospital Universitario Nuestra Señora de Candelaria, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain
b Servicio de Pediatría, Mälarsjukhuset, Eskilstuna, Sweden
Resumen

Las pruebas básicas de estudio de la función renal como la osmolalidad urinaria máxima y la eliminación urinaria de albúmina y de N-acetil-glucosaminidasa se alteran con mucha frecuencia en situaciones clínicas que cursan con hiperpresión en la vía urinaria o con pérdida de parénquima renal. No obstante, en todos los algoritmos que se pueden consultar dedicados al estudio de los niños con infección urinaria o dilatación de la vía urinaria nunca se menciona el beneficio del uso de esos parámetros funcionales. En esta revisión, ofrecemos información acerca de la utilidad práctica que conlleva la determinación de los parámetros básicos de estudio de la función renal. A partir de esos datos proponemos un algoritmo destinado a realizar una petición razonada de la cistografía conjuntando parámetros morfológicos y funcionales.

Abstract

Basic renal function tests such as maximum urine osmolality and urinary elimination of albumin and N-acetyl-glucosaminidase often reveal abnormalities in clinical cases involving hyperpressure in the urinary tract or loss of renal parenchyma. However, in all the available algorithms dedicated to the study of children with urinary tract infection or dilation, the benefit of using these functional parameters is not mentioned. In this review, we provide information about the practical usefulness of assessing the basic renal function parameters. From these data, we propose an algorithm that combines morphological and functional parameters to make a reasoned case for voiding cystourethrography.

Key words: Concentrating capacity, Albuminuria, N-acetyl-glucosaminidase, Cystourethrography, Vesicoureteral reflux
Palabras Clave: Capacidad de concentración, Albuminuria, N-acetil-glucosaminidasa, Cistografía, Reflujo vesicoureteral

The truth that seems hardest is but a kernel of another, more complete, truth, but it is never fully complete; and only thus can it be interpreted and judged.”

(Gregorio Marañón y Posadillo, 1887–1960)

In paediatric practice there are two very common situations in which it becomes necessary to make decisions regarding the morphological tests that we should use in young patients. We refer to urinary tract infections (UTI) and congenital anomalies of the kidney and urinary tract (CAKUT) that are all too often detected on ultrasounds performed in utero. In many cases, both situations occur simultaneously.

In the context of UTIs, specifically, the indication criteria for the tests to be performed have varied widely over time. Since vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) is a common finding in patients with UTI, the idea that it played a role in its pathogenesis was soon established, and so cystography was indicated and is still performed in many communities when facing a first infection. In addition, the idea that VUR was the cause of renal scarring resulting in the intiation chronic kidney failure, was cemented. It is from this that the term “reflux nephropathy” was coined, which has now fortunately been replaced by “nefropatía cicatricial [scarring nephropathy]” in Spanish. This “fear” of not diagnosing VUR early enough to prevent its potential complications ended up developing into a view that has been called the “reflux-centric” paradigm.1 Luckily this notion has been changing in recent years towards more cautious approaches.2,3

In all the algorithms dedicated to evaluation of children with UTI or CAKUT that can be consulted, kidney function parameters never appear among the variables or conditions that lead to ordering imaging test .4–6 This even happens in the algorithms designed by nephrologists. In this review, we offer information about the utility of basic kidney function tests in the management of children with UTI and CAKUT. Specifically, we will refer to testing the kidneys’ ability to manage water (maximum urine osmolality) and urinary elimination of albumin and N-acetyl-glucosaminidase (NAG).

Overview: on renal concentrating capacity, albuminuria, and N-acetyl-glucosaminidase

The history of testing the kidneys’ ability to finely adjust the body's water metabolism using urine concentration and dilution mechanisms goes back more than one and a half centuries. In 1859, Hoppe-Seyler (1825–1895) (Fig. 1), a German physiologist and chemist, demonstrated that when urine and serum from the same animal were separated by a membrane from a pig bladder, the flow direction was from the plasma towards the urine.7 As a result, he had discovered that urine could be more concentrated that the glomerular ultrafiltrate. Years later in Tübingen in 1892, Dreser (1860–1925) studied the physiology of water excretion. He established that the freezing point depression of blood determined cryoscopy (−0.56°C) was not altered by water intake, in contrast to what happens with urine. During water restriction, Dreser demonstrated that the freezing point of urine decreased −2.40°C in humans, in other words, the osmotic pressure of urine may be higher than that of plasma.8 In a patient with diabetes insipidus, the freezing point of urine was only −0.20°C; as described by Richet, probably the first ever use of cryoscopy in a patient.9 Shortly afterwards in Paris, Winter determined the freezing point of many fluids and confirmed Dreser's findings.10

Fig. 1.

Felix Hoppe-Seyler (1825–1895).

Later, the Hungarian doctor Korányi (1866–1944) supposed that the kidneys regulate the osmotic pressure of urine so that the osmotic pressure of blood remains constant. To do this, he studied the changes in the freezing point depression of urine during water restriction and observed that in patients with terminal uraemia the osmotic pressure of urine hardly changed and was significantly closer to the value for plasma.9,11 He called this situation isostenuria. Based on these findings, he was the first to introduce the functional concept of renal insufficiency.12 It should therefore be noted that this very familiar term for current nephrologists arose from the study of the kidneys’ ability to manage water.

Albarrán (1860–1912) (Fig. 2) was a Cuban urologist who studied medicine in Barcelona. In 1878 he moved to Paris where he worked with the anatomist Ranvier (1835–1922) and the urologist Guyon (1831–1920). Albarrán was responsible for a basic and little known discovery. At a time when the only known imaging test was the recently discovered X-ray, he could discern which kidney was diseased in the case of unilateral lesions potentially requiring surgery, such as, for example, in renal tuberculosis. To do this, he created the so-called “Albarran lever”, a small addition to the cystoscope through which he could direct a catheter towards to the ureteral meatus to directly collect urine coming from each kidney.13 Afterwards, he created one of the first stimulus function tests, the “experimental polyuria” test. In the presence of a water stimulus, the healthy kidney adapted to the stimulus and the disease one did not14 (Fig. 3). His book, Exploration des functions rénales, written in 1905 is, surely, the first in history on the topic and a historical debt held collectively by nephrologists.14

Fig. 2.

Joaquín Albarrán (1860–1912).

Fig. 3.

Joaquín Albarrán's “experimental polyuria” test. In the presence of a water stimulus, the healthy kidney (rein sain) adapts by increasing the volume of urine and the diseased kidney (rein malade) does not.14.

In 1909, Ambard and Papin laid out the concept of maximum concentration, thus providing all the elements for a new function assessment index. At that time it was known that, even during periods of severe dehydration, urine continued to be formed. It is what came to be called the “obligatory urine” of Ambard and Papin.15

Soon tests were designed to stimulate the maximum urine concentrating capacity by restricting liquids, such as the tests by Volhard16 and Addis and Schevky,17 in which the osmotic pressure of urine was no longer determined but rather its density (specific gravity). In any case, with these tests the production of endogenous ADH was stimulated. Decades later, the so-called “dry diet” test would also become standard in children starting at 2 years of age, although it measured urinary osmolality.18

Starting in the 1910s, information about how the pituitary gland regulates water excretion through the kidneys began to be available.19 Soon it could be demonstrated that the posterior portion of this gland produced an antidiuretic substance that behaves like an “authentic” hormone by passing through circulation and acting on the kidney.20 Subsequently, pituitary extracts started to be used to determine maximum urinary osmolality.21,22

In 1968, a synthetic analogue of vasopressin, desmopressin, became available23 and concentration test could be conducted more comfortably and in less time since it had a greater antidiuretic effect than the natural hormone.24

It is outside the scope of this review to discuss the anatomic and functional complexity of the kidney's urine concentrating mechanism, the details of which have been coming to light, as indicated above, for more than a century and a half with key moments such as understanding the countercurrent mechanism25 or the discovery of aquaporins.26

Remember that the renal concentrating capacity depends on an adequate glomerular ultrafiltrate supply to the tubules, a hypertonic medullary interstitium, a structurally intact medullary countercurrent mechanism,25 and normal water permeability of the tubules in response to vasopressin. The concentrating capacity is dependent on the renal medulla.27 The degree of medullary concentration is established primordially by the renal tubules in the loop of Henle and the blood vessels surrounding it (vasa recta) during the countercurrent exchange process. The purpose of this mechanism is to create a hypertonic medullar interstitium.25 In this hypertonic interstitium, vasopressin can concentrate the urine through a passive water equilibrium mechanism in the main cells of the collecting ducts, which allows the tubular lumen contents to equilibrate with the hypertonic medullary interstitium.28 Vasopressin secretion in response to water restriction causes the intracellular aquaporin-2 vesicles (AQP2) to relocate in the apical membrane of the main collecting duct cells. This shift allows water to be reabsorbed from the tubular lumen into the cell and, therefore, concentration of the final urine29 (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4.

Simplified model of the urine concentrating mechanism. To create a hypertonic medullary interstitium, adequate function of all the tubular sodium transporters is necessary, for example, NHE3 (type 3 Na+/H+ exchanger), NaPi-2, (type 2 Na-Pi cotransporter), BSC-1 (type 1 bumetanide-sensitive Na-K-2Cl cotransporter), or TSC (thiazide-sensitive cotransporter) in the lumen side of the tubule (mechanism 1). A defect in its function would cause a loss of saline with an accompanied loss of water that would cause a less hypertonic medullary interstitium. Furthermore, adequate function of the urea transporters (UT-A1, UT-A2, UT-A3) is necessary to increase the medullary interstitium osmolality (mechanism 2). In the presence of this hypertonic medullary interstitium, vasopressin can concentrate the urine thanks to the stimulus it exercises on the aquaporins (AQP), which enables the tubular lumen content to become equilibrated with the hypertonic medullar interstitium (mechanism 3).

The introduction of albuminuria and NAG determination in clinical practice is much more recent. Nevertheless, finding proteinuria was one of the first kidney function tests discovered in history., In 1764 Cotugno (1736–1822) described a typical case of acute nephritis with anasarca and large quantities of a heat-coagulable substance ovi albumini persimilem in the urine.30 His findings were confirmed years later by the English physician Blackall (1771–1860). Nevertheless, at the end of the 1980s, suitable techniques were available that enabled small quantities of albumin to be measured that were not measurable with earlier techniques. The term microalbuminuria has been widely used to refer to it, despite being incorrect from a semantic point of view. Therefore it is better to simply use the name albuminuria. It was initially used in clinical practice to try to detect incipient diabetic nephropathy.31 Since then it has been demonstrated that continued elevated excretion is an early sign of glomerular damage in processes that occur with hyperfiltration, both in cases in which the patients had all their nephrons (diabetic nephropathy32, obesity33) as well as in those where there is loss of parenchyma.34 Later it was demonstrated that it is also a good predictor of developing cardiovascular disease.35 In children, it has been observed that it can be elevated in cases of VUR.36,37 One unknown question is if this increase is due to the parenchymal loss that may exist in some VUR cases (renal dysplasia, scarring) or to the elevated pressure of VUR on the urinary tract.

Since the 1960s it has been known that NAG is an enzyme present in kidney tissues,38 in the lysosomes of the proximal tubular cells, and that its excretion in urine increases when cells are damaged and NAG is releases into the tubular lumen .39 Classically, the determination of NAG was used to evaluate the nephrotoxicity caused by aminoglycoside antibiotics.40 Moreover, NAG levels may be increased in cases of elevated intratubular pressure as in urinary tract obstruction41 and in VUR, although in this case, as occurs with albuminuria, it is difficult to know if it is due to the elevated pressure or to the associated reduction of glomerular filtration.36

On basic determinations of kidney function as markers of parenchyma loss

In a study including 77 children with normal renal parenchyma as confirmed by dimercaptosuccinic acid scan and 102 children with loss of parenchyma (one or more scars, single kidney, hypodysplasia), we determined the quality and diagnostic efficiency of the kidney function markers listed above. The sensitivity of maximum urine osmolality was 30.4% for detecting loss of parenchyma (84.8% specificity), 15.6% for urinary albumin excretion (92.1% specificity), 11.5% for NAG/creatinine ratio (100% specificity), and 8.9% for glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (100% specificity). However, it is striking that higher sensitivity (37.9%) was observed with urine volume corrected for 100ml of GFR. This finding demonstrates how this parameter that is rarely used, but is easy to calculate, (plasma creatinine×100/urine creatine) can be very useful in daily practice. In any case, it was demonstrated that the parameters that reflects the kidneys’ ability to manage water are the most sensitive for detecting loss of parenchyma.42 As a corollary to this study, we can emphasize that GFR was the least sensitive parameter and that the sensitivity reached with the parameters studying the kidneys’ ability to manage water was very low; therefore, currently we do not have methods that can adequately assess a modest nephron loss.

In 2008, in a study including data from 160 children with UTI or CAKUT, we proved that, in those with a normal maximum urine osmolality, the GFR was always normal while all patients with a reduced GFR had an altered concentrating capacity.43 In that study, the GFR was calculated with the classic Schwartz formula that uses a constant value of 0.55, which now we recognize that it overestimates GFR. In a recent review using the new formulas to calculate the GFR including cystatin C that are more accurate,44 we observed that a few children in stage G2 chronic kidney disease still concentrate well (near the lower limit of normality), but they are the exception that confirm the rule (data not published). In daily practice with our young patients if the maximum urine osmolality is normal we do not draw blood to confirm a normal GFR.

As is known, in the Clinical Practice Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Chronic Kidney Disease 2012 (KDIGO Guidelines), stage G1 of chronic kidney disease is defined by the presence of abnormalities of kidney structure or function, present for at least 3 months and not accompanied by GFR deterioration.45 Interestedly, the authors of the guidelines, among other functional alterations, included increased albuminuria but did not mention changes in the kidney's ability to manage water. In a recent study, we studied 116 children with an abnormal dimercaptosuccinic acid scan.46 Among the 100 children in stage G1 included, the frequency of a concentrating capacity defect (29%) and increased urine volume (20%) was higher than that of an increase in albuminuria (12%) and urinary excretion of NAG (3%). All the included children in stages G2-G5 had alterations in the kidneys’ ability to manage water. Furthermore, a direct correlation was observed between the GFR calculated with the 2012 CKID Schwartz formula47 and the maximum urine osmolality (r=0.63; p<0.001) (Fig. 5b).

Fig. 5.

(a) In 1934 Alving and Van Slyke observed a direct correlation between urea clearance and the maximum urine specific gravity (density) obtained with a “dry diet”. (b) In a group of current paediatric patients we found a correlation with a similar slope between the GFR and the maximum urine osmolality reached after desmopressin stimulation. Observe that in both figures the points are more dispersed in cases with normal GFR than when the kidney disease is advanced.

All the data listed in this section coincide with what Korányi began to glimpse a century ago9,11,12 and with what was confirmed by both Alving and van Slyke in 193448 (Fig. 5a) and Epstein in 1966.49 In the words of this last author: “The ability of the kidneys to excrete a concentrated urine is impaired together with other renal functions whenever the kidneys are progressively scarred and the amount of functioning renal parenchyma is diminished. Concentrating capacity and glomerular filtration rate are therefore reduced roughly in parallel in many common diseases which cause widespread scarring of the kidneys”.49

On basic determinations of kidney function as markers of elevated pressure on the renal parenchyma

The results obtained in the experimental models that cause elevated pressure in the urinary tract are difficult to extrapolate to malformations that occur with hydronephrosis in humans, for two reasons. The first is that in both VUR and uteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction there may be an associated glomerular loss (renal dysplasia, scarring). The second is that in mild or moderate VUR the elevated pressure can be intermittent and in UPJ obstruction the pressure may vary extensively according to the degree of obstruction in the uteropelvic junction.

The authors’ concern about the presence of functional lesion in cases of hydronephrosis come from the past.50 In the 1960s it was demonstrated that an experimental ureteral obstruction produced an impairment in concentrating capacity.51 The possibility of using desmopressin allowed the determination maximum urine osmolality that was reduced in both adults52,53 and children with hydronephrosis and particularly in cases of UPJ obstruction.54,55 In addition, an association between VUR and a defect in concentrating capacity been frequentlydescribed.56–61

In recent years, there has been studies to identify the mechanisms that enable the kidney to handle water in situations of elevated pressure. Thus, it has been observed that urinary obstruction causes a reduction in: the activity of some sodium transporters in the tubules62–64 (mechanism 1, Fig. 4), the expression of the urea transporters65 (mechanism 2, Fig. 4), and in the activity of the aquaporins expressed in the collecting duct64,66 (mechanism 3, Fig. 4). All these changes cause polyuria and renal salt losses.

An increase in urine excretion of albumin has been described in both UPJ obstruction67 and VUR.36,37,68 Elevated excretion of NAG and other proteins, are markers of proximal tubule injury, have been shown in both circumstances, UPJ obstruction41,69,70 and VUR.36,71–73

In paediatric medicine there are cases of urinary tract dilation that are not secondary to VUR or to obstruction and there is evidenced elevated pressure in the urinary tract. For the cases in which the diameter of the renal pelvis is greater than 2cm and there is no elevated pressure, the term “primary hydronephrosis” has been used, and if the ureter is also dilated the expression “non-obstructive megaureter” has been used. So, in a study including 38 children with a pelvic diameter greater than 2cm, we studied if there were differences in the kidney function in the different types morphological abnormalities.74 Maximum urine osmolality was reduced in 100% of the VUR cases, in 75% of the UPJ obstruction cases, and in only 16.7% of the primary hydronephrosis cases. Albumin excretion in urine was increased in 62.5% of VUR cases and in only 8.3% of UPJ obstruction cases, and in 11.1% of primary hydronephrosis cases. In turn, NAG excretion was elevated in 42.8% of VUR cases, in 25% of UPJ obstruction cases, and in 6.7% of cases of primary hydronephrosis. Thus they observed how it is the most sensitive concentrating test for detecting alterations in kidney function in cases of hydronephrosis. Furthermore, albuminuria was especially elevated in the VUR cases, NAG is a less sensitive marker of elevated pressure than maximum urine osmolality, and, in cases of the primary hydronephrosis, kidney function was rarely altered.74

Dilatation of pyelocalix is a morphological abnormality (renal pelvis between 0.5 and 2cm in diameter), that is being increasingly diagnosed since the universal introduction of ultrasound scans performed in utero for pregnant women. Ectasias may be a sign of VUR or underlying obstructions but, in most cases the cause is not identifiable, in such a case it is named simple pyelectasis. Nevertheless, since it may be expression of underlying pathology, the question is whether all children should be studied using imaging tests that are expensive, not free of risk, and exposition to radiation. In a prospective study in which we evaluated 79 children with pyelectasis, 11 patients had VUR of different degrees.75 As compared with VUR patients, the 68 children without VUR showed a significantly higher maximum urine osmolality, while the albumin/creatine and NAG/creatinine ratios were significantly lower. The negative predictive value of the first two tests was 93%, which indicates that cystography may not be necessary, in those cases with normal maximum urine osmolality and albuminuria.75

In a longitudinal study including children with differing grades of VUR we observed that, at the time of diagnosis, the maximum urine osmolality was reduced in 69.5% of them61 but at the end of the follow-up period it was only present in 19.5%.76 At the beginning, the concentrating capacity defect was related to the degree of VUR and at the end of the follow up, the defect in concentration was related to the loss of parenchyma rather than the initial degree of VUR. As for albuminuria, there were no differences between the beginning and the end of the follow-up (19.6% vs. 17.6%). No correlation was observed between the degree of albuminuria and the intensity of VUR. It was concluded that urinary excretion of albumin is a preferred marker of hyperfiltration and loss of renal mass in children with VUR correlated.77 As for NAG, at the time of diagnosis it was elevated in 37% of cases; conversely, at the end of follow up it was normal in all cases. This suggests in these cases, urinary excretion of NAG is a moderately sensitive marker of elevated pressure in the urinary tract.78

On the specific case of vesicoureteral reflux in children who have urinary tract infections. An algorithm based on the basic tests of kidney function. Epilogue

The indication of voiding cystourethrography in series (VCUG) has varied over the years. For a long time it was thought that it should be ordered in all cases of UTI, especially in young children, and especially in males.79 This was motivated by the untrue belief that the cure of VUR, no matter its grade, would prevent the onset of new cases of UTI and secondary kidney damage. However this strategy has been a matter of debate because of the following reasons1–3,5,83: many cases of VUR heal spontaneously with time,80,81 low degree of VUR do not alter kidney function,76 and VUR is not the final cause of the UTIs82. One of the key questions on this topic is: Would there be any problems if low-intensity VUR is not diagnosed? We believe that the answer is “no”, because what is truly important is the quality and quantity of existing renal parenchyma and ensuring that kidney function is undamaged, using the most sensitive methods mentioned in this review. As indicated above, many cases of mild urinary tract dilation are not associated with VUR and, if they are, it is usually mild. The end result is that in both circumstances (UTI and ectasias), many VCUGs are normal and, therefore, unnecessary. We wanted to prove whether the combination of ultrasound tests and sensitive function tests could acceptably predict that the VCUG will be negative and, therefore, prevent it from being ordered.84 We thus collected ultrasound results and functional tests from 100 children with a normal VCUG and from 63 diagnosed with VUR (10 mild grade [I–II], 26 moderate [III], and 27 severe [IV–V]). The most sensitive morphological abnormalities for suspecting VUR were renal scarring, atrophic or hypodysplastic kidneys, hydronephrosis, and pyelolalix ectasia associated with other morphological abnormalities. In terms of kidney function, statistically significant differences (p=0.004) were shown by comparing maximum urine osmolality in children with or without VUR. The urinary excretion values of albumin and NAG were not sensitive, but very specific (87.9%) in the VUR cases. Combining the morphological and function parameters, 70% of children with mild VUR, 76.9% of those with moderate VUR, and 100% with severe VUR had morphological or function abnormalities. Thus, the highest negative predictive value (80.8%) for detecting VUR was obtained by combining morphological abnormalities, excluding simple pyelectasis, those who only had kidney functional abnormalities, and those with both functional and morphological alterations (116/163). Moreover, in those cases, the sensitivity for diagnosing VUR was 85.7%. Our conclusion is simple: if kidney function is normal, especially the concentrating capacity, and if there are no morphological abnormalities other than pyelectasis, the use of VCUG is not initially indicated. (Fig. 6). It is necessary to emphasize that, in the case of recent pyelonephritis, the tests should be performed after 2 and 4 month in order to avoid artefact in the results.

Fig. 6.

Proposed algorithm for ordering cystography in children with UTI or CAKUT based on specific ultrasound morphological data and basic kidney function tests.

In summary, the appropriate use of the basic kidney function tests offers the possibility of changing the strategy of ordering imaging tests in routine clinical practice in children with loss of renal parenchyma or urinary tract dilation. The renal concentration mechanism is so complex that any abnormality has repercussions on the maximum urine osmolality; as mentioned above, it is the first functional abnormality detected in many kidney disorders. Thus, in the absence of hydronephrosis, in children with UTI or ectasia of pyelocalix, ordering VCUG or nuclear medicine tests could be put off initially if the maximum urine osmolality and urinary excretion of albumin are normal. Conversely, abnormal kidney function would require further tests so the origin of these abnormalities is identified.

As written by Marañón in his Crítica de la Medicina dogmática (1950): “I want to tell to those working close to me, never forget that each thing that doctors know should be known as precisely as possible, but being aware that its value may be temporal.”

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Bibliography
1.
J.M. Fernández,S. Málaga
¿Es posible cambiar el paradigma reflujocéntrico?
.Evid Pediatr, 2 (2006), pp. 17
2.
R. Keren
Diminishing importance of screening and treating children for vesicoureteral reflux after a first urinary tract infection
.Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, 166 (2012), pp. 1181-1182 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/2013.jamapediatrics.175
3.
E. Paintsil
Update on recent guidelines for the management of urinary tract infections in children: the shifting paradigm
.Curr Opin Pediatr, 25 (2013), pp. 88-94 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MOP.0b013e32835c14cc
4.
M.S. Jaswon,L. Dibble,S. Puri,J. Davis,J. Young,R. Dave
Prospective study of outcome in antenatally diagnosed renal pelvis dilatation
.Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed, 80 (1999), pp. F135-F138
5.
S.D. Marks,I. Gordon,K. Tullus
Imaging in childhood urinary tract infections: time to reduce investigations
.Pediatr Nephrol, 23 (2008), pp. 9-17 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00467-007-0552-9
6.
N.G. Anderson,J. Fischer,D. Leighton,J. Hector-Taylor,R.L. McEwing
Management in children of mild posnatal renal dilatation but without vesicoureteral reflux
.Pediatr Nephrol, 25 (2010), pp. 477-483 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00467-009-1348-x
7.
F. Hoppe
Ueber die Bildung des Harns
.Arch Pathol Anat, 16 (1859), pp. 412-413
8.
H. Dreser
Ueber Diurese und ihre Beeinflussung durch pharmakologische Mittel
.Arch Exp Pathol Pharmacol, 27 (1892), pp. 303-319
9.
G. Richet
The osmotic pressure of the urine – from Dutrochet to Korányi, a trans-European interdisciplinary epic
.Nephrol Dial Transpl, 16 (2001), pp. 420-424
10.
J. Winter
Etudes sur la concentration des urines, ses limites
.Arch Physiol, 8 (1896), pp. 529-536
11.
G. Richet
Edema and uremia from 1827 to 1905: the first faltering steps of renal pathophysiology
.Kidney Int, 43 (1993), pp. 1385-1396
12.
S. Sonkodi
Hyposthenuria Sándor Korányi's concept of renal insufficiency
.Am J Nephrol, 19 (1999), pp. 320-322 http://dx.doi.org/13468
13.
A. Puigvert
Un médico hispano-cubano en La Sorbonne: Dr. J. Albarrán
.Med Clin, 35 (1960), pp. 141-146
14.
J. Albarrán
Exploration des functions rénales. Étude medico-chirurgicale
Masson & Cie, (1905)
15.
L. Ambard,E. Papin
Etude sur les concentrations urinaires
.Arch Intern Physiol, 8 (1909), pp. 437-490
16.
F. Volhard
Springer, (1918)
17.
T. Addis,M.C. Schevky
A test for the capacity of the kidney to produce a urine of high specific gravity
.Arch Int Med, 30 (1922), pp. 559-562
18.
C.M. Edelmann Jr.,H.L. Barnett,H. Stark,H. Boichis,J.R. Soriano
A standarized test of renal concentrating capacity in children
.Am J Dis Child, 114 (1967), pp. 639-644
19.
K. Motzfeldt
Experimental studies on the relation of the pituitary body to renal function
.J Exp Med, 25 (1917), pp. 153-188
20.
A. Gilman,L. Goodman
The secretory response of the posterior pituitary to the need for water conservation
.J Physiol, 90 (1937), pp. 113-124
21.
J. Campistol Vila
Prueba del agua-hipofisina para la exploración renal de la infancia
.Rev Esp Pediatr, 7 (1951), pp. 775-789
22.
K. Bjerre-Christensen
The pitressin test of renal concentrating capacity; a comparative evaluation of the Addis–Shevky and Pitressin tests
.Acta Med Scand, 142 (1952), pp. 215-230
23.
I. Vávra,A. Machová,V. Holecek,J.H. Cort,M. Zaoral,F. Sorm
Effect of a synthetic analogue of vasopressin in animals and in patients with diabetes insipidus
.Lancet, 1 (1968), pp. 948-952
24.
A.S. Aronson,N.W. Svenningsen
DDAVP test for estimation of renal concentrating capacity in infants and children
.Arch Dis Child, 49 (1974), pp. 654-659
25.
J.P. Kokko,F.C. Rector Jr.
Countercurrent multiplication system without active transport in inner medulla
.Kidney Int, 2 (1972), pp. 214-223
26.
B.M. Denker,B.L. Smith,F.P. Kuhajda,P. Agre
Identification, purification, and partial characterization of a novel Mr 28,000 integral membrane protein from erythrocytes and renal tubules
.J Biol Chem, 263 (1988), pp. 15634-15642
27.
E. Weinstein,A. Manitius,F.H. Epstein
The importance of aerobic metabolism in the renal concentrating process
.J Clin Invest, 48 (1969), pp. 1855-1861 http://dx.doi.org/10.1172/JCI106151
28.
R.A. Fenton,M.A. Knepper
Mouse models and the urinary concentrating mechanism in the new millennium
.Physiol Rev, 87 (2007), pp. 1083-1112 http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/physrev.00053.2006
29.
Y. Noda,E. Sohara,E. Ohta,S. Sasaki
Aquaporins in kidney pathophysiology
.Nat Rev Nephrol, 6 (2010), pp. 168-178 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrneph.2009.231
30.
W. Dock
Some early observers of albuminuria
.Ann Med Hist, 4 (1922), pp. 287-290
31.
P. Coutarel,A. Grimaldi,F. Bosquet,G. Bureau,F. Thervet
Which method of urine collection and expression of results for albuminuria when screening for incipient diabetic nephropathy
.Diabetes Care, 11 (1988), pp. 371-372
32.
G. Dahlquist,E.L. Stattin,S. Rudberg
Urinary albumin excretion rate and glomerular filtration rate in the prediction of diabetic nephropathy; a long term follow-up study of childhood onset type-1 diabetic patients
.Nephrol Dial Transpl, 16 (2001), pp. 1382-1386
33.
N. Løkkegaard,I. Haupter,T.B. Kristensen
Microalbuminuria in obesity
.Scand J Urol Nephrol, 26 (1992), pp. 275-278
34.
T.H. Hostetter,J.L. Olson,H.G. Rennke,M.A. Venkatachalam,B.M. Brenner
Hyperfiltration in remnant nephrons: a potentially adverse response to renal ablation
.Am J Physiol, 241 (1981), pp. F85-F93
35.
J.S. Yudkin,R.D. Forrest,C.A. Jackson
Microalbuminuria as predictor of vascular disease in non-diabetic subjects. Islington Diabetes Survey
.Lancet, 2 (1988), pp. 530-533
36.
P.A. Tomlinson,J.M. Smellie,N. Prescod,R.N. Dalton,C. Chantler
Differential excretion of urinary proteins in children with vesicoureteric reflux and reflux nephropathy
.Pediatr Nephrol, 8 (1994), pp. 21-25
37.
R. Konda,H. Kakizaki,H. Nakai,Y. Hayashi,S. Hosokawa,S. Kawaguchi
Urinary concentrations of alpha-1-microglobulin and albumin in patients with reflux nephropathy before and after puberty
.Nephron, 92 (2002), pp. 812-816 http://dx.doi.org/65462
38.
P.G. Walker,J.W. Woollen,R. Heyworth
Studies on glucosaminidase. 5. Kidney N-acetyl-β-glucosaminidase and N-acetyl-β-galactominidase
.Biochem J, 79 (1961), pp. 288-292
39.
D. Robinson,R.G. Price,N. Dance
Rat-urine glycosidases and kidney damage
.Biochem J, 102 (1967), pp. 533-538
40.
T. Naruse,N. Hirokawa,S. Oike,T. Maekawa
Clinical evaluation of urinary N-acetyl-beta-d-glucosaminidase activity in patients receiving aminoglycoside and cephalosporin drugs
.Res Commun Chem Pathol Pharmacol, 31 (1981), pp. 313-329
41.
M.C. Carr,C.A. Peters,A.B. Retik,J. Mandell
Urinary levels of the renal tubular enzyme N-acetyl-beta-d-glucosaminidase in unilateral obstructive uropathy
.J Urol, 151 (1994), pp. 442-445
42.
V.M. García-Nieto,M. Afonso-Coderch,V.E. García-Rodríguez,M. Monge-Zamorano,M.J. Hernández-González,M.I. Luis-Yanes
Índices de calidad y eficiencia diagnóstica de varios marcadores de función renal para detectar la pérdida de parénquima en la edad pediátrica
43.
V. García Nieto,M.I. Luis Yanes,M. Monge Zamorano,M.J. Hernández González,C. Peralta Aros,H.E. Garin
Renal concentrating capacity as a marker for glomerular filtration rate
44.
R. Montañés Bermúdez,S. Gràcia García,G.M. Fraga Rodríguez,J. Escribano Subías,M.J. Diez de los Ríos Carrasco,A. Alonso Melgar
Documento de consenso: recomendaciones sobre la utilización de ecuaciones para la estimación del filtrado glomerular en niños
.An Pediatr (Barc), 80 (2014), pp. 326.e1-326.e13
45.
Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD Work Group
KDIGO 2012 clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease
.Kidney Int Suppl, 3 (2013), pp. 1-150
46.
V.M. García Nieto,F. Fortich,M.I. Luis Yanes,C. Tripodi,P. Arango Sancho
Water renal management is altered more frequently than albuminuria in children in the G1 stage of the 2012 KDIGO Guideline
47.
G.J. Schwartz,M.F. Schneider,P.S. Maier,M. Moxey-Mims,V.R. Dharnidharka,B.A. Warady
Improved equations estimating GFR in children with chronic kidney disease using an immunonephelometric determination of cystatin C
.Kidney Int, 82 (2012), pp. 445-453 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ki.2012.169
48.
A.S. Alving,D.D. van Slyke
The significance of concentration and dilution tests in Bright's disease
.J Clin Invest, 13 (1934), pp. 969-998 http://dx.doi.org/10.1172/JCI100640
49.
F.H. Epstein
Disorders of renal concentrating ability
.Yale J Biol Med, 39 (1966), pp. 186-195
50.
R.A. Johnson
Renal function in experimental hydronephrosis
.J Exp Med, 28 (1918), pp. 193-212
51.
E.E. Selkurt
Effect of ureteral blockade on renal blood flow and urinary concentrating ability
.Am J Physiol, 205 (1963), pp. 286-292
52.
S. Nilsson,M. Aurell,C.G. Bratt
Maximum urinary concentration ability in patients with idiopathic hydronephrosis
.Br J Urol, 51 (1979), pp. 432-436
53.
C.G. Bratt,M. Aurell,O. Jonsson,S. Nilsson
Long-term followup of maximum concentrating ability and glomerular filtration rate in adult obstructed kidneys after pyeloplasty
.J Urol, 140 (1988), pp. 273-276
54.
M. Kekomäki,M. Reunanen,P. Vilkki
Desaminocysteine-d-arginine vasopressin test in the evaluation and postoperative followup of obstructed kidneys in infancy and childhood
.J Urol, 128 (1982), pp. 981-983
55.
U. Samuelson,G. Granerus,J. Bjures,S. Hagberg,K. Hjälmås
Renal function in idiopathic hydronephrosis in children. Follow-up after conservative and surgical treatment
.Scand J Urol Nephrol, 18 (1984), pp. 135-141
56.
D.T. Uehling
Effect of vesicoureteral reflux on concentrating ability
.J Urol, 106 (1971), pp. 947-950
57.
D. Walker,G. Richard,D. Dobson,B. Finlayson
Maximum urine concentration. Early means of identifying patients with reflux who may require surgery
.Urology, 1 (1973), pp. 343-346
58.
R.D. Walker 3rd,G.A. Richard,R.S. Fennell,A. Iravani,E. Garin
Renal growth and scarring in kidneys with reflux and a concentrating defect
.J Urol, 129 (1983), pp. 784-786
59.
M. Kekomäki,R.D. Walker
Fractional excretion of magnesium and renal concentrating capacity in refluxing renal units
.J Urol, 140 (1983), pp. 1095-1096
60.
R. Gobet,L.J. Cisek,B. Chang,C.E. Barnewolt,A.B. Retik,C.A. Peters
Experimental fetal vesicoureteral reflux induces renal tubular and glomerular damage, and is associated with persistent bladder instability
.J Urol, 162 (1999), pp. 1090-1095
61.
A. Ibáñez,M.I. Luis Yanes,M.D. Rodrigo,M. Monge,A. Jarque,V. García-Nieto
Determination of 3 markers of renal function at the beginning and at the end of the period of follow-up in children diagnosed with vesicoureteral reflux
.Pediatr Nephrol, 23 (2008), pp. 1384
62.
C.G. Bratt,M. Aurell,O. Jonsson,S. Nilsson
Influence of intrapelvic pressure on excretion of sodium from human hydronephrotic kidneys
.Eur Urol, 12 (1986), pp. 334-339
63.
C. Li,W. Wang,T.H. Kwon,M.A. Knepper,S. Nielsen,J. Frøkiaer
Altered expression of major renal Na transporters in rats with bilateral ureteral obstruction and release of obstruction
.Am J Physiol Renal Physiol, 285 (2003), pp. F889-F901 http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/ajprenal.00170.2003
64.
Y. Shi,C. Li,K. Thomsen,T.M. Jørgensen,M.A. Knepper,S. Nielsen
Neonatal ureteral obstruction alters expression of renal sodium transporters and aquaporin water channels
65.
C. Li,J.D. Klein,W. Wang,M.A. Knepper,S. Nielsen,J.M. Sands
Altered expression of urea transporters in response to ureteral obstruction
.Am J Physiol Renal Physiol, 286 (2004), pp. F1154-F1162 http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/ajprenal.00453.2003
66.
C. Li,W. Wang,T.H. Kwon,L. Isikay,J.G. Wen,D. Marples
Downregulation of AQP1, -2, and -3 after ureteral obstruction is associated with a long-term urine-concentrating defect
.Am J Physiol Renal Physiol, 281 (2001), pp. F163-F171
67.
G.Y. Deng,J.J. Sun,P. Wang,J.C. Mo
Renal parenchymal thickness and urinary protein levels in patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction after nephrostomy placement
68.
G. Lama,M.A. Tedesco,L. Graziano,E. Calabrese,C. Grassia,F. Natale
Reflux nephropathy and hypertension: correlation with the progression of renal damage
.Pediatr Nephrol, 18 (2003), pp. 241-245 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00467-003-1068-6
69.
M.A. Taha,A.A. Shokeir,H.G. Osman,A.-A. Abd El-Aziz,S.E. Farahat
Obstructed versus dilated nonobstructed kidneys in children with congenital ureteropelvic junction narrowing: role of urinary tubular enzymes
70.
A.A. Shokeir,M.A. Taha
Role of urinary tubular enzymes in evaluation of children with ureteropelvic junction narrowing under conservative management
71.
M.C. Carr,C.A. Peters,A.B. Retik,J. Mandell
Urinary levels of renal tubular enzyme N-acetyl-β-d-glucosaminidase in relation to grade of vesicoureteral reflux
.J Urol, 146 (1991), pp. 654-656
72.
M.A. Williams,D. Jones,N.H. Noe
Urinary N-acetyl-beta-glucosaminidase as a screening technique for vesicoureteral reflux
.Urology, 43 (1994), pp. 528-530
73.
H. Miyakita,P. Puri
Urinary levels of N-acetyl-beta-d-glucosaminidase: a simple marker for predicting tubular damage in higher grades of vesicoureteric reflux
.Eur Urol, 25 (1994), pp. 135-137
74.
M. Monge,I. Abreu-Yanes,V. García-Rodríguez,S. González-Cerrato,M.I. Luis-Yanes,F. Claverie-Martin
Differences in renal function in 3 morphological anomalies that occur with severe dilation on the urinary tract in children
.Pediatr Nephrol, 26 (2011), pp. 1700
75.
V. García Nieto,S. González Cerrato,V.E. García Rodríguez,O. Mesa Medina,M.J. Hernández González,M. Monge Zamorano
¿Debe realizarse una cistografía a todos los lactantes con dilatación leve y moderada de las vías urinarias? Las pruebas de función renal pueden ayudar a responder esta pregunta
76.
A. Ibáñez Alonso,M.I. Luis Yanes,N. Carmona Cedrés,L. Antón Hernández,V. García Nieto
Determinación de la función renal al final del periodo de seguimiento en niños diagnosticados de reflujo vesicoureteral
.Arch Esp Urol, 61 (2008), pp. 167-172
77.
M.I. Luis-Yanes,L. Martín-Conde,M.I. Hernández-Sanjuán,J.R. Alberto-Alonso,M.J. Hernández-González,L. Antón
Albumin urinary excretion is preferently a hyperfiltration marker in children with vesicoureteral reflux
.Pediatr Nephrol, 26 (2011), pp. 1700
78.
M.J. Hernández-González,S. González-Cerrato,N. Álvarez-Martín,M. Monge,M.I. Luis-Yanes,L. Antón
N-acetylglucosaminidase is a marker of high pressure at the urinary tract in vesicoureteral reflux
.Pediatr Nephrol, 26 (2011), pp. 1700-1701
79.
Working Group of the Research Unit of the Royal College of Physicians
Guidelines for the management of acute urinary tract infection in childhood
.J R Coll Phys, 25 (1991), pp. 36-43
80.
B.S. Arant Jr.
Medical management of mild and moderate vesicoureteral reflux: follow up studies of infants and young children. A preliminary report of the Southwest Pediatric Nephrology Study Group
.J Urol, 148 (1992), pp. 1683-1687
81.
T. Tamminem-Mobius,E. Brunier,K.D. Ebel,R. Lebowitz,H. Olbing,U. Seppanen
Cessation of vesicoureteral reflux for 5 years in infants and children allocated to medical treatment
.J Urol, 148 (1992), pp. 1662-1666
82.
E.H. Garin,A. Campos,Y. Homsy
Primary vesicoureteral reflux: review of current concepts
.Pediatr Nephrol, 12 (1998), pp. 249-256
83.
P.T. Dick,W. Feldman
Routine diagnostic imaging for childhood urinary tract infections: a systematic overview
.J Pediatr, 128 (1996), pp. 15-22
84.
M. Monge,V.E. García Rodríguez,L. Díaz González,C. Mir Perello,M.I. Luis Yanes,V.M. García Nieto
Voiding cystourethrogram indication revisited. Utility of the combinated morphological and functional renal studies
.Pediatr Nephrol, 29 (2014), pp. 1798
Sociedad Española de Nefrología
Órgano Oficial de la Sociedad Española de Nefrología
Contact | Legal Notice | Privacy policy | Cookies policy