Article Type : Case Report
Authors : Lakssir J, Bellouki O, Kadouri Y*, El Sayegh H and Nouini Y
Keywords : Nasopharyngeal metastasis; Swelling; Pain
Among all congenital abnormalities, anomalies of urinary tract represent about one quarter in which the incidence of double ureter is rather common (about 1 in 125 or 0.8%), whereas a bilateral duplex collecting system is an unusual abnormality. We present a case of a patient with a combination of ureteral duplicity and ureteral bifidity.
Malformations of the urinary system are common and are
found in about 3 percent of live births. These various malformations include
malrotation, ectopia and other morphological variations such as number of
ureters, kidneys. Duplex ureter is one of those malformations, which occurs 1
in 125 cases or 0.8% of a non-selected population with female to male ratio of
1.6:1 or 62% of females. A duplex ureter may be unilateral or bilateral and it
also may be complete or incomplete. The duplication of the ureter is the most
common anomaly; however bilateral total duplication is unsual. Patients with
this anomaly have an increased risk of hydronephrosis, stone formation, and
urinary tract infections. Therefore, considering a rare occurrence of
duplication, its embryological significance and clinical implications, we
report a case of ureteral duplicity and ureteral bifidity.
A 38-year-old married arab woman has been admitted to
our urology department. She has been hospitalized to explore her right low back
pain. A physical examination was normal. Her temperature was 37.3?°C, with a
pulse rate at 76 beats per minute and her blood pressure was 130/70?mmHg.
Laboratory tests were normal; in particular, a urine examination showed no
bacteriuria or leukocyturia. She underwent an abdominal ultrasound which showed
an asymmetric size of the kidneys with a cute right hydronephrosis. An
abdominal and pelvic computed tomography (CT) scan detected a left completely
duplicated collecting system with no hydroureteronephrosis. On the right, an
uncomplet duplicated ureter before joining the bladder with
hydroureteronephrosis. The patient was put on medical treatment controlled six
months later with an abdominal ultrasound and did not have any medical
intervention.
In this case, we present a bilateral duplex collecting
system. The limitation of our approach was the duration of the follow-up which
is only lasted approximately six months. The discussion will point out the
originality of the abnormality. Bilateral duplex collecting system is an
uncommon abnormality. It occurs in 1 in 500 persons and is found in 0.3% of
excretory urograms [1]. Some cases have been reported on bilateral duplex
collecting system [2-3]. But there are not much data about it. Generally, the
cases reported in the literature are mostly related to unilateral duplex
collecting system. According to the Weigert–Meyer law, the upper pole ureter
typically opens medially while the lower pole ureter opens laterally. Complete
ureteral duplication may be associated with other congenital anomalies such as
an upper moiety ureter with an ureterocele causing obstruction or a short lower
moiety intramural ureter causing VUR [4]. VUR almost always occurs into the
lower pole moiety due to its lateral displacement within the bladder [5].
However, the association of bilateral duplex collecting system, bilateral VUR,
and refluxing upper pole moiety is not clearly described in the literature to
the best of our knowledge.
Based
on the available literature, the present case is very rare. Usually it will be
detected at autopsy or as radiological finding but is associated with wide
variety of clinical manifestations. Hence the knowledge of which should be
borne in mind when dealing with a case of repeated urinary infections, urinary
reflux disorders, hydronephrosis or stone formation.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Consent for publication: The patient included in this study gave a verbal consent to participate in this research, and to publish the data contained within this study.
Availability of data and material: Not applicable
Competing interests: The authors report no competing personal or financial interests.
Funding: This
study had no funding from any resource.
All the authors contributed to the realization of this
work by the study of the medical files, and ensuring the interventions, the
discussions of the care as well as the reading of the work after its writing.
Acknowledgment: Not applicable