Hydatid disease of the urinary tract: review of the management of 9 cases

The aim of this study is to review 9 cases with urinary tract hydatid disease in terms of symptoms, findings, laboratory tests, radiological findings and treatment modalities. There were 7 males and 2 females with a mean age of 33.6 years (range from 7 to 67 years). In 6 patients hydatid cyst was lo...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International urology and nephrology 2001, Vol.33 (2), p.329-334
Hauptverfasser: Ozbey, I, Aksoy, Y, Biçgi, O, Polat, O
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The aim of this study is to review 9 cases with urinary tract hydatid disease in terms of symptoms, findings, laboratory tests, radiological findings and treatment modalities. There were 7 males and 2 females with a mean age of 33.6 years (range from 7 to 67 years). In 6 patients hydatid cyst was located in the kidney (1 involved the liver), in 2 the cysts were in the paravesical and retrovesical region (1 coexisted bladder tumor) and 1 the cyst was located adrenal gland. The investigations included urinalysis, eosinophil count, Casoni skin test, indirect haemagglutination test (IHA), transabdominal ultrasonography (TAUS), intravenous urography (IVU) and computed tomography (CT). All patients underwent various surgical procedures and were followed-up for an average of 3 years (range: 1 month to 5 years) period in terms of complications and recurrence rates. The most common symptom was lumbar or abdominal pain. Eosinophilia was seen in 4 patients (44.4%), IHA positivity in 3 patients (33.3%) and Casoni skin test were positive in 3 patients (33.3%). The most diagnostic method of radiological investigations was abdominal pelvic CT (100%). After surgical treatment, in mean a 3 year (range: 1 month to 5 years) follow-up period, no complication and recurrence were seen. Hydatid disease of the urinary tract is relatively uncommon and is likely to cause considerable diagnostic difficulties for clinicians and radiologists: therefore, it should be born in mind in the differential diagnosis of space-occupying lesions of the urinary tract.
ISSN:0301-1623
1573-2584
DOI:10.1023/A:1015209106436