Mutations in Uroplakin IIIA are a rare cause of renal hypodysplasia in humans

BACKGROUND: Renal hypodysplasia, characterized by a decrease in nephron number, small overall kidney size, and maldeveloped renal tissue, is a leading cause of chronic renal failure in young children. Familial clustering and renal hypodysplasia phenotypes observed in transgenic animal models suggest a genetic contribution. Uroplakin IIIa (encoded by UPIIIA) is an integral membrane protein present in urothelial plaques, and the murine UPIIIa knockout is associated with urothelial anomalies and vesicoureteral reflux. De novo UPIIIA mutations recently were identified in 4 of 17 patients with severe bilateral renal adysplasia. METHODS: To evaluate the overall role of UPIIIA in human renal hypodysplasia pathogenesis, we performed UPIIIA mutation analysis in a cohort of 170 pediatric patients affected by severe unilateral or bilateral renal hypodysplasia. Eighty-one patients were affected by bilateral nonobstructive renal hypodysplasia; of these, 61 were without vesicoureteral reflux. Eighty-four patients presented with unilateral nonobstructive renal hypodysplasia, including 24 patients with unilateral multicystic dysplastic kidneys. Family history was positive in 11%. RESULTS: Mutation analysis showed 2 heterozygous mutations not observed in 200 race-matched control chromosomes. In only 1 family was distribution of the UPIIIA mutation consistent with a disease-causing effect. This de novo missense mutation (Gly202Asp) was identified in a patient with unilateral multicystic dysplastic kidneys. The second (intronically located) mutation appeared unlikely to be disease causing because it did not segregate with an obvious disease phenotype in the affected family. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that de novo mutations in UPIIIA can be involved in defective early kidney development, but probably constitute only a rare cause of human renal hypodysplasia in a minor subset of individuals.

Scores and stages in nephrology.

In this article we review the most relevant acronyms, scores and classifications in the fields of nephrology and urology, including the newest definitions of acute kidney injury and chronic kidney diseases. We will also present a short overview of the histopathological Lupus nephritis classification, the renal cysts Bosniak classification and the vesicoureteral reflux grading.

Laboratory based investigations for diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux disease

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) still remains the most common out- GI-related condition in the out-patient setting. While primary care physicians often use empiric trials with proton pump inhibitors (PPI trial) to diagnose GERD, often specialised tests are required to confirm or exclude gastroesophageal reflux causing esophageal or extraesophageal symptoms. The most commonly used procedures to diagnose GERD include: conventional (catheter based) pH monitoring, wireless esophageal pH monitoring (Bravo), bilirubin monitoring (Bilitec), and combined multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring (MII-pH). Each technique has strengths and limitations of which clinicians and investigators should be aware when deciding which one to choose.

Erosive esophageal reflux vs. non erosive esophageal reflux: oral findings in 71 patients.

BACKGROUND The purpose of this clinical study was to assess the prevalence of acidic oral mucosal lesions and periodontal conditions in patients suffering from erosive esophageal reflux disease (ERD) compared with non erosive esophageal reflux disease (NERD) patients, both treated with long term proton pump inhibitors (PPI). METHODS Seventy-one patients with diagnosed GERD were studied: i.e. 29 ERD and 42 NERD patients. Thorough visual examination of the oral mucosa and a periodontal evaluation was performed. The primary outcome was defined as a statistically significant difference, between the two groups, in the presence of acidic lesions of the oral mucosa and specific periodontal parameters. RESULTS This study failed to demonstrate statistically significant differences between ERD and NERD patients with respect to the prevalence of oral mucosal lesions. However, significantly more ERD patients suffered from severe periodontitis (CAL ≥ 5 mm) as compared to NERD patients. Accordingly, it may be assumed that PPI-use had no adverse effects on the prevalence of acidic oral mucosal lesions and on periodontal destruction. CONCLUSIONS Within the limitations of this study it may be concluded that ERD and NERD patients need separate evaluation with respect to periodontal destruction. Moreover, long term PPI medication had no adverse clinical impact on acidic oral mucosal lesions and periodontal destruction. Further studies are necessary to elucidate the role of reflux in the periodontal destruction of ERD individuals.