Etiology and Treatment of Renal Forniceal Rupture: A Single Center Experience

Objective: To evaluate the clinical findings, treatment methods and outcomes of patients treated for renal forniceal rupture (RFR). Materials and Methods: Files and records of the patients treated for RFR between January 2013 and November 2016 were evaluated retrospectively. In primary treatment; ureteroscopy and laser/pneumatic lithotripsy (URL) with stone fragmentation and double J (JJ) stent placement were performed in patients with no finding of sepsis. However, only JJ stent/percutaneous nephrostomy placement was performed in those with sepsis findings. The demographic characteristics, related symptoms, and the results of primary and secondary treatment of the patients were evaluated. Results: We had 43 patients with a mean age of 48.6±16.6 years. No cause was found in 4 patients while a urological cause was identified in 39 of them by using anamnesis, physical examination, laboratory and imaging methods. Out of 43 patients, percutaneous nephrostomy catheterization was performed in 5 of 32 patients under primary treatment. URL and JJ stenting were performed in the remaining 11 patients. Additionally, due to giant retroperitoneal urinoma, a retroperitoneal drain was placed in 2 patients by interventional radiology clinic. Conclusion: URL and stone fragmentation seem to be feasible treatment option in the primary treatment of patients with RFR without sepsis findings.