Re: Etiology of right sided hydronephrosis in pregnancy
From: Dave Berck (djberck@yahoo.com)
Thu Apr 28 14:47:39 2005
I though it had to do with dextrorotation of the
uterus.
--- Orlando Ultrasound <orlandoultrasound@hotmail.com>
wrote:
---------------------------------
---------------------------------
--
---------------------------------
COULD THIS BE DUE TO MORE COMPRESSION ON THE RIGHT
SIDE, BEING AS THE LIVER IS LARGER THUS SLIGHTLY
DISPLACING THE RIGHT RENAL INFERIORLY. WITH THE MORE
INFERIOR PLACEMENT OF THE RIGHT KIDNEY, AND THE
INCREASING UTERINE SIZE, THE RT URETER AND THE UTERUS
MEET SOONER THAN THE LEFT WITH MORE PRESSURE FROM THE
SUPERIOR ASPECT OF THE LIVER ???
KEVIN
Doug Marcum BA,RDMS,RDCS,RVT(APS)
Kevin Snider RDMS,RDCS,RVT
Chad Hall RDMS, RDCS, RVT
Orlando Ultrasound Associates, Inc.
Diagnostics - Consulting- Education
Office: (407)273-7303
Toll Free: (866)-613-7303
>From: "DuBose, Terry" <DuboseTerryJ@uams.edu>
>Reply-To: ultrasound@obgyn.net >To: Multiple
recipients of list ULTRASOUND
<ultrasound@dns.obgyn.net> >Subject: Etiology of right
sided hydronephrosis in pregnancy >Date: Thu, 28 Apr
2005 10:13:52 -0500 > >I need some help finding an
explanation of why maternal hydronephrosis >is more
common on the right side than the left. > > > >Seems I
read somewhere, years ago, that it has to do with the
left iliac >artery protecting the left ureter from
compression, while the right >iliac is more midline
and the uterus can compress the right ureter. I >found
the following abstract, but unfortunately do not have
access to >the electronic version... and will not be
able to get to the library >this week. I doubt it will
explain the etiology anyway. > > > >Anyone have a
reference or good explanation for this phenomenon? > >
> >Thanks, Terry > > > >Terry J. DuBose, M.S., RDMS,
FSDMS, FAIUM > >Associate Professor & Director
>Diagnostic Medical Sonography Program >University of
Arkansas for Medical Sciences, CHRP >4301 West Markham
St. Mail Slot #563 >Little Rock, Arkansas, 72205 USA
>501-686-6510 >DuBoseTerryJ@UAMS.edu
>http://www.io.com/~dubose/
>http://www.uams.edu/chrp/dms/default.asp
>http://www.obgyn.net/us/panel/panel.htm
>---------------------------------------------------------------
> >Authors > > Eckford SD. Gingell JC. > >Institution
>---------------------------------------------------------------
> > Department of Obstetrics, Southmead Hospital,
>---------------------------------------------------------------
Bristol. > >Title > > Ureteric obstruction in
pregnancy--diagnosis and management. > >Source > >
British Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology.
98(11):1137-40, 1991 >Nov. > >Local Messages > > All @
UAMS > >Abstract > > OBJECTIVE--To discuss the
aetiology, diagnosis and management of >ureteric
obstruction in pregnancy and to describe the use of
>double-pigtail ureteric stents in a series of 10
patients. >DESIGN--Retrospective study of women
presenting to a maternity unit in >whom the diagnosis
of ureteric obstruction is reached.
>SETTING--Southmead Hospital in Bristol; a large
district general >hospital with a throughput of around
6000 maternity patients per year. >SUBJECTS--10 women
(8 in their first pregnancy, 1 in her second and 1 in
>her third; mean age 29.2 years (range 18-31 years).
>INTERVENTIONS--Double-pigtail ureteric stents were
electively passed >after a diagnosis of ureteric
obstruction. Stents remained in situ for a >mean 15.5
weeks (range 8-25 weeks) and were electively removed
4-6 weeks >post partum. RESULTS--Nine women progressed
uneventfully through the >remainder of their
pregnancy. One developed strangury, haematuria and
>discomfort after stent insertion. Seven women had
normal vaginal >deliveries, two assisted vaginal
deliveries and one was delivered by >caesarean
section. None required to have external urinary
drainage. >CONCLUSIONS--Double-pigtail ureteric stents
are easy to place and remove >and are well tolerated.
They provide a simple, safe and effective method >of
internal upper urinary tract drainage in ureteric
obstruction in >pregnancy. > > > > > >
>Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message,
including any attachments, is for the sole use of the
intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are
not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
message. >
David J. Berck, MD, MPH
