Clin Infect Immun
Clinical Infection and Immunity, ISSN 2371-4972 print, 2371-4980 online, Open Access
Article copyright, the authors; Journal compilation copyright, Clin Infect Immun and Elmer Press Inc
Journal website http://www.ciijournal.org

Original Article

Volume 3, Number 1, March 2018, pages 1-8


Emphysematous Pyelonephritis: A Correlation of Clinical Characteristics With Serum Parameters and Its Contribution in Determination of Prognostic Factors

Rajeev T.Pa, Yashasvi Singha, c, Sasanka Kumar Baruaa, Debanga Sarmaa, Manash Pratim Kashyapb

aDepartment of Urology, Third Floor, GMCH Complex, GMC Hostel Road, Bhangagarh, Guwahati, 781032, Assam, India
bNorth Eastern Regional Institute of Management, Padma Nath Sarmah Bhawan, Khanapara, Guwahati, 781022, Assam, India
cCorresponding Author: Yashasvi Singh, Department of Urology, Third Floor, GMCH Complex, GMC Hostel Road, Bhangagarh, Guwahati, 781032, Assam, India

Manuscript submitted February 27, 2018, accepted March 13, 2018
Short title: EPN: Determination of Prognostic Factors
doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/cii41w

Abstract▴Top 

Background: Emphysematous pyelonephritis (EPN) is a severe life-threatening infection of renal parenchyma, peri-renal tissue and collecting system primarily caused by gas forming bacteria and carries a significant mortality of 80% when primarily treated non-surgically. Early identification of the disease process along with timely surgical management is of paramount significance. In the last 2 decades evolution of surgical management has lead to a substantial decrease in mortality of up to 21%. The focus of the present study was to investigate optimal serum panel parameters and to propagate prognostic model for the optimal evaluation management of EPN.

Methods: The present study was conducted at the Department of Urology at GMCH, Gauhati. Authors retrospectively analyzed all clinical, laboratory and radiological data along with outcome of 44 patients with EPN from January 2015 to August 2017. Chi-square analysis and Spearman tests were used to carve out significant association and correlation.

Results: The overall survival rate was 86.37% (38/44). Escherichia coli (E.Coli) was the most common bacterial pathogen isolated from urine and pus culture. Uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM), polymicrobial infection, shock, thrombocytopenia, bacteremia, hypoalbuminemia, and hemodialysis were significantly more common in cases of death and correlated with adverse serum profile. The AUC of the ROC curve for the seven prognostic factors was 0.59 and only thrombocytopenia (TCP) (AUC = 0.78, P = 0 .033) along with liver cirrhosis (AUC = 0.76, P = 0.018) came out to be significant post ROC analysis.

Conclusions: Upfront clinical factors such as uncontrolled DM type 2, polymicrobial infection, shock, thrombocytopenia, bacteremia, hypoalbuminemia, hemodialysis along with altered serum parameters are significantly correlated with outcome in patients of EPN.

Keywords: Polymicrobial infection; Thrombocytopenia; Bacteremia; Hypoalbuminemia; Hemodialysis; Emphysematous pyelonephritis

Introduction▴Top 

Emphysematous pyelonephritis (EPN) is an infrequent type of necrotizing infection, and is lethal if not managed promptly. EPN is defined as a subtle and serious infection of the renal parenchyma and peri-renal tissue, which results in gas within the renal parenchyma, collecting system or perinephric tissue. Although it was first described in 1898, the term EPN was first used in 1962. It has a female: male predominance of 4:1 and a mean (range) age of 57 (24 - 83) years [1]. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a major source for these infections and is also associated with an increased risk of asymptomatic bacteriuria and certain symptomatic UTIs (urinary tract infections) such as renal and perinephric abscess, cystitis and Candida infections [2, 3]. The exact etiopathogenesis of emphysematous UTIs is poorly understood. Elevated tissue glycemic levels in diabetic patients may provide a more favorable microenvironment for gas-forming microbes. Nonetheless, bacterial gas production does not fully explain the pathologic and clinical manifestations of emphysematous UTI [4, 5]. Uncontrolled DM and urinary tract obstruction are the major risk factors for emphysematous UTIs. In past studies, diabetes was present in more than 80% of patients with EPN, at least 50% of patients with emphysematous pyelitis, and 60-70% of patients with emphysematous cystitis [6-8].

Though it is a serious and life-endangering disease with a mortality rate of up to 50%, there is no clear consensus on the optimal treatment of these patients [9]. The mainstay of management is an emergency nephrectomy (EN), percutaneous drainage (PCD), or medical management (MM), with or without stenting of the urinary tract. Few centers recommend that timely EN should be the primary treatment [10], but other studies proposed a more conservative approach with PCD [11, 12], and a conservative mode with IV antibiotics and other supportive analgesics (non- NSAID) alone has also been advocated [13, 14], which further enhances the management scenario. To standardize the management protocol, a few studies have observed mortality rates stratified by risk variables, separating which patients need more urgent action [15, 16-18]. However, these studies were only based on few patients but also had different results for the same risk variable. Nevertheless, because there is no formidable evidence, these studies remain the only guide for managing EPN. Therefore the aim of this study was to systematically review past reports and to ascertain the mortality rate of each treatment from the available series. Furthermore, the present study aimed to risk-stratify the prognostic factors across the published studies to determine the specific factors determining poor outcome of EPN and to throw light on the clinical and laboratory presentation of patients with EPN.

Methods▴Top 

The present study was conducted at the Department of Urology and Renal Transplantation at GMCH, Gauhati. Authors retrospectively analyzed all clinical, laboratory and radiological data along with outcome of 44 patients with EPN from January 2015 to August 2017. The main objective was to determine the mortality rate associated with EPN, depending on the various treatments offered. The three main treatments reviewed were EN, PCD and conservative MM. The secondary aim was to assess the risk factors associated with death along with the most common presenting symptoms and most common causative organisms. Where available, patients with risk factors for death were compared to those with no or minimal risk factors. Furthermore, the risk of death was assessed based on the different types of classification of EPN.

According to the Huang system, class 1 EPN is defined as gas in the collecting system only; class 2 as gas in the renal parenchyma with no extension to the extrarenal space; class 3A as extension of gas or abscess to the perinephric space; class 3B as extension of gas or abscess to the pararenal space; and class 4 as bilateral EPN or EPN in a solitary kidney [19]. Clinical and biochemical variables were extracted from patient records from different departments depicting information on demographics, length of hospitalization, presenting symptoms, diagnostic tests, culture results, laboratory findings, treatment, and mortality rate. For continuous data, a Mantel-Haenszel Chi-square test was used and expressed as the mean difference with 95% CI, and for dichotomous data an inverse variance was used and expressed as the odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI. In both groups P < 0.05 was considered to indicate significance. Thrombocytopenia (TCP) was defined as a platelets less than 120,000/mL, hyponatremia as serum Na < 135 mEq/L, hypoalbuminemia as serum albumin < 3.0 g/dL. Septic shock was defined as persisting hypotension requiring vasopressors to maintain a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 65 mm Hg or higher and serum lactate > 18 mg/dL. Patients with an absolute increase in serum creatinine of ≥ 0.3 mg/dL after admission compared with nadir serum creatinine level were diagnosed with AKI (acute kidney injury). Recurrent EPN was diagnosed when both clinical presentation of sepsis and progressive lesions on the imaging study were noted within 3 months after adequate treatment. A poor outcome was declared in cases of death or recurrent EPN. The management modalities consisted of antibiotics alone; PCD with antibiotics; and nephrectomy, if progressive or persistent lesions were detected on imaging studies with clinical scenario of unstable hemodynamics or prolonged fever on MM.

Results▴Top 

From a period of January 2015 to August 2017, 44 patients were diagnosed with EPN based on clinical, biochemical suspicion along with contrast enhanced computed tomography (CECT) W/A report. There were 28 female and 16 male out of which five female (17.85%) and two male (12.5%) patients were eventually lost during the course of their treatment (Fig. 1). The median age of the patients in the study was 60 years (SD = 11.253) (Fig. 2).

Figure 1.
Click for large image
Figure 1. Showing gender wise distribution with EPN frequency.

Figure 2.
Click for large image
Figure 2. Showing histogram depicting median age with frequency of disease.

A total of 33 patients (75%) had uncontrolled type 2 DM. Obstructive uropathy and urolithiasis occurred in 38.6% (n = 17) and 43.2% (n = 19) patients respectively. Other clinical characteristics which were assessed were hypertension (22 patients, 50%), hyponatremia (38 cases, 86.4%), liver cirrhosis (25 patients, 56.8%), thrombocytopenia (23 patients, 52.3%), hypoalbuminemia (28 cases, 63.6%), and cerebrovascular accident (12 patients, 27.3%). Three patients presented with septic shock out of which two patients eventually succumbed to their disease. Bacteremia diagnosed with positive blood cultures taken during fever spikes was present in 14.3% (n = 18) cases and one patient suffering from persistent bacteremia died in spite of all measures available at hand. AKI was diagnosed subsequently in 34.1 % (n = 15) cases. Emergency hemodialysis was done in 36.4% (n = 16) cases after consultation with nephrology department. Altered mental state was observed in 17 cases (38.6%). Polymicrobial infection was present in 45.5% (n = 20) and its incidence in the non-survival group was 71.4 % (n = 5). The left kidney was more frequently involved (54.5%, n = 24) than the right side (45.5%, n = 20). Table 1 shows the clinical and epidemiological characteristics of the survivors and non-survivors.

Table 1.
Click to view
Table 1. Comparison of the Epidemiological and Clinical Profile Between Survivors and the Non-Survivors
 

The median leukocyte count with interquartile range at admission was 16,220 ± 8,697/µL (7,875 - 20,008) (Fig. 3). Similarly the mean platelet and median albumin count was 1.10 ± 0.23 lakhs/µL and 2.3 ± 0.65 mg/dL (1.82 - 2.76) (Fig. 4, 5). Three patients had class 1, 11 had class 2, 15 each had class 3A and class 3B CECT imaging findings based on the Huang and Tseng classification. E. coli was the most common organism cultured from specimens of urine, blood and pus, and was seen in 63.64 % patients. The other organisms included Klebsiella pneumoniae (22.72%), Proteus mirabilis (18.18%), Enterococcus species (12.5%), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (11.36%). Urine culture was positive in 36 patients out of which 16 patients had polymicrobial infection. Bacteremia occurred in 18 patients, with polymicrobial bacteremia in 12 and E. coli in six patients. Culture of pus from PCD was positive in 24 of 44 patients, with polymicrobial culture in five, Proteus mirabilis in six, E. coli in 10 and Pseudomonas aeruginosa in three patients (Table 2). The overall survival rate was 84.09% (37/44). Uncontrolled DM type 2 (P = 0.032), hyponatremia (P = 0.013), TCP (P = 0.006), hypoalbuminemia (P = 0.041), bacteremia (P = 0.028), shock on initial presentation (P = 0.013) and polymicrobial infection (P = 0.011) were significantly associated in the non-survivors than in the survivors. There were no statistically significant differences between the non-survivors and survivors with respect to AKI, CVA, AMS, urinary tract obstruction, and urolithiasis.

Figure 3.
Click for large image
Figure 3. Showing histogram depicting median leukocyte with frequency of disease.

Figure 4.
Click for large image
Figure 4. Showing histogram depicting median platelet with frequency of disease.

Figure 5.
Click for large image
Figure 5. Showing histogram depicting median albumin with frequency of disease.

Table 2.
Click to view
Table 2. Causative Organisms From Blood, Urine and Pus Culture With Their Distribution
 

Recurrent EPN occurred in seven patients (7/44, 15.91%) and overall seven patients died during the investigation duration. Tables 3 and 4 show the results of multivariate analysis of three significant independent variables in association with mortality and poor outcome based on the information which we gathered from Table 5 as it suggested the important parameters to work with. We also compared the group treated with antibiotics alone with the group that required urological interventions, including PCD and EN (Table 6). Treatment with IV antibiotics alone was successful in 43.18 % (n = 19) of patients and four patients succumbed in IV antibiotic group without giving any time for any surgical drainage or EN. Treatment with PCD and IV antibiotics was successful in 15 of 16 patients and one patient died due to severe sepsis. Five patients underwent EN and three of them survived. In the present analysis, three patients did not survive in the Tseng class 2 with mortality rate up to 27.27% (n = 3) which was maximum for the entire cohort while only one patient succumbed in the class 3A. Two patients were lost while still on MM and one each died just after PCD and EN in the respective group (Table 6). The casualty figure for the class 3B was at 20% (n = 3) with two patients lost during MM and one after EN. There were no significant alterations in the biochemical profile of the patients who did or did not undergo EN. All patients having the triple H condition consisting of hyponatremia (P = 0.014), hypoalbuminemia (P = 0.031), and need for emergency hemodialysis (P = 0.011) required urgent intervention as per the statistical parameters obtained after analyzing their procedural records. Seven independent variables (hypoalbuminemia, shock, bacteremia, need for hemodialysis, polymicrobial infection, hypoalbuminemia, TCP) that were significantly different between survivors and non-survivors along with liver cirrhosis, were evaluated by ROC analysis and the AUC. The AUC of the ROC curve for the seven prognostic factors was 0.59 and only TCP (AUC = 0.78, P = 0.033) along with liver cirrhosis (AUC = 0.76, P = 0.018) came out to be significant post ROC analysis (Fig. 6).

Table 3.
Click to view
Table 3. Multivariate Analysis Predicting Significant Variables for Mortality
 

Table 4.
Click to view
Table 4. Multivariate Analysis Predicting Significant Variables for Morbidity
 

Table 5.
Click to view
Table 5. The Odds Ratio and Correlation of Clinical Parameters Between Survivors and Non-Survivors
 

Table 6.
Click to view
Table 6. Comparison of the Clinical Profile Between Procedure (PCD/EN) and the Medical Management Group
 

Figure 6.
Click for large image
Figure 6. Showing ROC analysis of two significant variables: TCP and liver cirrhosis.
Discussion▴Top 

EPN demands urgent management because of the life-threatening nature of the septic complications. The present retrospective study sought to chalk out the parameters that were marker of high mortality and unfavorable outcome. From the available past literature, there is an ascendancy of EPN in females, owing to their increased perceptivity to UTI [20, 21]. The female to male ratio of our cohort is in conjunction to that reported by one of the study, but much higher ratios have been reported previously [22, 23]. As per other series, our maximum patients presented with fever with or without flank pain. On an average, our patients had symptoms for 3 days or more before hospital admission which further explains why in few patients the infective etiology had already lapsed into septic shock. Laboratory parameters in our study conformed to those published in the literature, with TCP, leukocytosis and renal impairment being the most common findings [8, 24, 25].

After examination of the entire panel of biochemical and clinical parameters it was observed that DM type 2, hyponatremia, liver cirrhosis, TCP, hypoalbuminemia, shock, bacteremia, need for HD and polymicrobial (PMI) as significantly associated with the outcome of EPN. DM type 2 appeared to be the most important risk factor for EPN resulting in serious complications (Table 5). Since a high tissue dextrose level provides a congenial environment for the growth of gas-forming micro-organism, DM type 2 was associated with increased mortality in the present study (P = 0.032, OR = 0.18), with significant correlation with the outcome (r = -0.523, P = 0.035). The present outcome is in agreement with most of the past literature but goes against one of the published past study [26].

In ASA grade 3, four patients’ albumin concentration of < 3.5 g/dL has been correlated with increased morbidity which reflects the low synthesis, prompt degradation and loss of albumin, in addition to faulty exchange between the intravascular and extravascular compartments. In an analysis of over 15,000 diseased patients, an admission serum albumin < 3.4 g/dL was seen as a strong forecaster of mortality [27]. It has been observed that survival in AKI is significantly affected by the level of serum albumin [28]. In our retrospective cohort, hypoalbuminemia (< 3.0 g/dL) was associated with an increased mortality rate (2/7, 28.6%, P = 0.041). Though accelerated breakdown of protein is a precursor of metabolic alterations in patients with AKI, we could not find any such significant association or correlation with the same independently in our study. Generally albumin production is suppressed in response to inflammatory scenario but hypoalbuminemia was probably associated with the AKI in our cohort. When the patients with liver cirrhosis were also included along with hypoalbuminemia (Chi-square coefficient 6.33, P = 0.012), there was a significant correlation between survival and the same (r = 0.379, P = 0.011). Therefore, hypoalbuminemia along with liver cirrhosis is a factor that should be evaluated as a predictor of outcome in patients with EPN.

TCP (platelet count < 120,000/mL) at admission has been projected to be an independent prognostic factor for poor outcome. In our present study, TCP was significantly associated with mortality (P = 0.01). All the seven patients in the non-surviving group had TCP along with severe liver cirrhosis, which might result in TCP.

Need for hemodialysis, hyponatremia and hypoalbuminemia during management was identified as a marker for urgent intervention in the intervention vs. MM group in multivariate analysis. Septic shock at time of admission, bacteremia, hypoalbuminemia, DM type 2 and polymicrobial infection were found to be predictor of poor outcome on multivariate Cox regression analysis. It was further observed that no significant association exist between higher mortality in EPN and overall age and sex or other comorbidities, such as HTN, CVA, obstructive uropathy, urolithiasis, AKI and AMS.

E. coli was the most common organism and present in 63.64% patients followed by PMI which was present in 45.50% evenly distributed in the 2 year period. Regarding the bacterial resistance, one patient grew methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (as a constituent of PMI) in his blood, and another patient had extended-spectrum beta-lactamase Klebsiella pneumonia (1/8) from their urine. Pertaining to the management policy of EPN, the usual management of EPN until 1980s has been EN and/or open surgical drainage in addition with IV antibiotics, with a mortality rate of 40-50%. The advent of PCD techniques led to maximum nephron sparing and return of renal function [29]. The last 2 decades has seen EPN mortality declining to 21% owing to the widespread use of PCD. Majority of our cases received IV antibiotics alone or PCD in company with antibiotics in this 2-year investigation period. In our analysis management with IV antibiotics alone was successful in majority of patients and four patients died without giving any time for PCD or EN. Treatment with PCD and IV antibiotics was successful in 93.75% patients and one patient died due to severe sepsis. Five patients underwent EN and 60% of them survived. EN was done out for prolonged fever and sepsis in these five patients. In the present analysis, three patients did not survive in the Tseng class 2 with mortality rate up to 27.27% which was the maximum for the entire cohort while only one patient succumbed in the class 3A. Two patients were lost while still on MM and one each died just after PCD and EN in the respective group. The casualty figure for the class 3B was at 20% with two patients lost during MM and one after EN. These observations strongly indicate that the management of septic shock and appropriate IV antibiotic therapy are priorities during initial EPN treatment. A judicial diagnosis is pivotal, and aggressive treatment should be pursued in these cases. Early studies noted that early and prompt surgical treatment resulted in a successful outcome, as compared with medical treatment alone [7, 30]. In 1986, one study proposed that USG guided PCD treatment of EPN with good clinical outcome [31]. Since then, many EPN series have reported favorable outcomes with PCD treatment, which has now been regarded as the initial mode of treatment in the majority of EPN patient [32]. It has been postulated that the aim of EPN management should not be mere survival but also to increase the chance of renal recovery. In contrast to early analysis, recent EPN series have found a higher mortality resulting from EN vis a vis conservative approach consisting of IV antibiotics and PCD [15, 33]. Nonetheless, investigators have warned against the universal use of PCD in all EPN cases, with subsequent EN only if required. One study stated that of the 19 patients who had PCD as management protocol, the procedure failed in 11 of them, five of whom eventually died [34]. In Huang and Tseng’s series, 92% of the patients with poor risk CECT class 3 and class 4 failed PCD miserably, with a mortality rate of 15% [35]. In our analysis, we found a higher mortality among conservatively treated patients as compared with those who received any form of early intervention. When we analyzed the fate of patients who were conservatively managed to those who received EN, although a larger proportion of patients collapsed from conservative treatment alone, the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.845) which is most likely related to our small sample size. In one large analysis of EPN series, conservative treatment, type 1 EPN (Wan system), thrombocytopenia, and bilateral EPN were predictors for mortality [36]. In a recent series, the researchers found AMS, TCP, renal failure and severe hyponatremia to be associated with higher mortality in EPN [37].

In 2000, Huang and Tseng described four distinct radiological classifications of EPN based on the extent of gas seen on CECT. There was a trend towards higher mortality in patients with protracted disease, and patients with type 1 EPN had the best outcome. Nonetheless, in the present analysis, the fallout of patients with class 3 EPN was not statistically different from those with class 2 disease. Consistent with past studies, there was also no statistically significant difference in our study of the rate of class 2 and 3B CT images in patients requiring EN because of poorly controlled infection versus those not requiring EN. It has been postulated that the degree of renal parenchyma destruction rather than the extent of gas predicted the need for EN. When equal significance was applied to each risk factor identified by univariate analysis, trend analysis reported that the risk of death was directly associated with the number of prognostic factors (P = 0.002). There were significant digression in risk of mortality between patients who had ≥ five prognostic factors (P = 0.02), which is in disjunction to the results of Khaira et al [26]. As per our knowledge this is the first sojourn to identify the number of prognostic factors that were significantly associated with mortality and poor outcome in this part of the country.

Present study had several limitations. First, it was a retrospective study and the number of cases was too few to analyze other risk factors which led to lack of significance of some of the factors analyzed. Second, we did not designate a specific follow-up period for discharged patients irrespective of the management offered. However, we believe that a 6-month follow-up period is sufficient to demonstrate the trends of the disease outcomes

Conclusions▴Top 

The authors in the present retrospective analysis reported overall mortality of 15.91% in present study vis a vis 18% of several previous meta-analysis. The AUC of ROC for TCP and liver cirrhosis had statistically significant power to predict mortality. Patients without DM type 2 had urinary albumin acting as a substrate for the gas-producing organism. PMI acts a milestone for sudden deterioration. Admission serum albumin < 3.32 g/dL was a strong predictor of mortality. Both PCD and MM were associated with significant lower mortality rates than with EN alone. If both PCD and MM did not result in enhancement of the recovery, bypassing of obstruction was needed before contemplating EN. Last but not the least the amount of renal destruction rather than the extent of gas predicted the need for EN.


References▴Top 
  1. Narlawar RS, Raut AA, Nagar A, Hira P, Hanchate V, Asrani A. Imaging features and guided drainage in emphysematous pyelonephritis: a study of 11 cases. Clin Radiol. 2004;59(2):192-197.
    doi
  2. Ronald A, Ludwig E. Urinary tract infections in adults with diabetes. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2001;17(4):287-292.
    doi
  3. Geerlings SE, Stolk RP, Camps MJ, Netten PM, Collet TJ, Hoepelman AI, Diabetes Women Asymptomatic Bacteriuria Utrecht Study G. Risk factors for symptomatic urinary tract infection in women with diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2000;23(12):1737-1741.
    doi pubmed
  4. Boyko EJ, Fihn SD, Scholes D, Chen CL, Normand EH, Yarbro P. Diabetes and the risk of acute urinary tract infection among postmenopausal women. Diabetes Care. 2002;25(10):1778-1783.
    doi pubmed
  5. Huang JJ, Tseng CC. Emphysematous pyelonephritis: clinicoradiological classification, management, prognosis, and pathogenesis. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160(6):797-805.
    doi
  6. Grupper M, Kravtsov A, Potasman I. Emphysematous cystitis: illustrative case report and review of the literature. Medicine (Baltimore). 2007;86(1):47-53.
    doi pubmed
  7. Evanoff GV, Thompson CS, Foley R, Weinman EJ. Spectrum of gas within the kidney. Emphysematous pyelonephritis and emphysematous pyelitis. Am J Med. 1987;83(1):149-154.
    doi
  8. Pontin AR, Barnes RD, Joffe J, Kahn D. Emphysematous pyelonephritis in diabetic patients. Br J Urol. 1995;75(1):71-74.
    doi pubmed
  9. Somani BK, Nabi G, Thorpe P, Hussey J, Cook J, N’Dow J, ABACUS Research Group. Is percutaneous drainage the new gold standard in the management of emphysematous pyelonephritis? Evidence from a systematic review. J Urol. 2008;179(5):1844-1849.
    doi pubmed
  10. El-Nahas AR, Shokeir AA, Eziyi AK, Barakat TS, Tijani KH, El-Diasty T, Abol-Enein H. Kidney preservation protocol for management of emphysematous pyelonephritis: Treatment modalities and follow-up. Arab J Urol. 2011;9(3):185-189.
    doi pubmed
  11. Chen MT, Huang CN, Chou YH, Huang CH, Chiang CP, Liu GC. Percutaneous drainage in the treatment of emphysematous pyelonephritis: 10-year experience. J Urol. 1997;157(5):1569-1573.
    doi
  12. Wang JM, Lim HK, Pang KK. Emphysematous pyelonephritis. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2007;41(3):223-229.
    doi pubmed
  13. Nagappan R, Kletchko S. Bilateral emphysematous pyelonephritis resolving to medical therapy. J Intern Med. 1992;232(1):77-80.
    doi pubmed
  14. Lin YC, Lin YC, Lin HD, Lin LY. Risk factors of renal failure and severe complications in patients with emphysematous pyelonephritis-a single-center 15-year experience. Am J Med Sci. 2012;343(3):186-191.
    doi pubmed
  15. Shokeir AA, El-Azab M, Mohsen T, El-Diasty T. Emphysematous pyelonephritis: a 15-year experience with 20 cases. Urology. 1997;49(3):343-346.
    doi
  16. Kumar VS, Lakshmi AY. Emphysematous pyelonephritis. Indian J Nephrol. 2004;14:192-194.
  17. Kelly HA, MacCallum WG. Pneumaturia. JAMA. 1898;31:375.
    doi
  18. Schultz EH, Jr., Klorfein EH. Emphysematous pyelonephritis. J Urol. 1962;87:762-766.
    doi
  19. Hildebrand TS, Nibbe L, Frei U, Schindler R. Bilateral emphysematous pyelonephritis caused by Candida infection. Am J Kidney Dis. 1999;33(2):E10.
    doi
  20. Johnson JR, Ireton RC, Lipsky BA. Emphysematous pyelonephritis caused by Candida albicans. J Urol. 1986;136(1):80-82.
    doi
  21. Levy AH, Schwinger HN. Gas-containing perinephric abscess. Radiology. 1953;60(5):720-723.
    doi pubmed
  22. Michaeli J, Mogle P, Perlberg S, Heiman S, Caine M. Emphysematous pyelonephritis. J Urol. 1984;131(2):203-208.
    doi
  23. Tienza A, Hevia M, Merino I, Velis JM, Algarra R, Pascual JI, Zudaire JJ, et al. Case of emphysematous pyelonephritis in kidney allograft: Conservative treatment. Can Urol Assoc J. 2014;8(3-4):E256-259.
    doi pubmed
  24. Stapleton A. Urinary tract infections in patients with diabetes. Am J Med. 2002;113(Suppl 1A):80S-84S.
    doi
  25. Al-Geizawi SM, Farney AC, Rogers J, Assimos D, Requarth JA, Doares W, Winfrey S, et al. Renal allograft failure due to emphysematous pyelonephritis: successful non-operative management and proposed new classification scheme based on literature review. Transpl Infect Dis. 2010;12(6):543-550.
    doi pubmed
  26. Khaira A, Gupta A, Rana DS, Gupta A, Bhalla A, Khullar D. Retrospective analysis of clinical profile prognostic factors and outcomes of 19 patients of emphysematous pyelonephritis. Int Urol Nephrol. 2009;41(4):959-966.
    doi pubmed
  27. Kapoor R, Muruganandham K, Gulia AK, Singla M, Agrawal S, Mandhani A, Ansari MS, et al. Predictive factors for mortality and need for nephrectomy in patients with emphysematous pyelonephritis. BJU Int. 2010;105(7):986-989.
    doi pubmed
  28. Lu YC, Chiang BJ, Pong YH, Huang KH, Hsueh PR, Huang CY, Pu YS. Predictors of failure of conservative treatment among patients with emphysematous pyelonephritis. BMC Infect Dis. 2014;14:418.
    doi pubmed
  29. Falagas ME, Alexiou VG, Giannopoulou KP, Siempos II. Risk factors for mortality in patients with emphysematous pyelonephritis: a meta-analysis. J Urol. 2007;178(3 Pt 1):880-885; quiz 1129.
    doi pubmed
  30. Kondo T, Okuda H, Suzuki M, Okumura T, Toma H. [A case of emphysematous pyelonephritis improved with conservative therapy - indication for conservative therapy]. Hinyokika Kiyo. 2000;46(5):335-338.
    pubmed
  31. Flores G, Nellen H, Magana F, Calleja J. Acute bilateral emphysematous pyelonephritis successfully managed by medical therapy alone: a case report and review of the literature. BMC Nephrol. 2002;3:4.
    doi pubmed
  32. Cheng YT, Wang HP, Hsieh HH. Emphysematous pyelonephritis in a renal allograft: successful treatment with percutaneous drainage and nephrostomy. Clin Transplant. 2001;15(5):364-367.
    doi pubmed
  33. Smitherman KO, Peacock JE, Jr. Infectious emergencies in patients with diabetes mellitus. Med Clin North Am. 1995;79(1):53-77.
    doi
  34. Godec CJ, Cass AS, Berkseth R. Emphysematous pyelonephritis in a solitary kidney. J Urol. 1980;124(1):119-121.
    doi
  35. Huang JJ, Chen KW, Ruaan MK. Mixed acid fermentation of glucose as a mechanism of emphysematous urinary tract infection. J Urol. 1991;146(1):148-151.
    doi
  36. Pontin AR, Barnes RD. Current management of emphysematous pyelonephritis. Nat Rev Urol. 2009;6(5):272-279.
    doi pubmed
  37. Aswathaman K, Gopalakrishnan G, Gnanaraj L, Chacko NK, Kekre NS, Devasia A. Emphysematous pyelonephritis: outcome of conservative management. Urology. 2008;71(6):1007-1009.
    doi pubmed


This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


Clinical Infection and Immunity is published by Elmer Press Inc.

 

Browse  Journals  

     

Journal of Clinical Medicine Research

Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism

Journal of Clinical Gynecology and Obstetrics

World Journal of Oncology

Gastroenterology Research

Journal of Hematology

Journal of Medical Cases

Journal of Current Surgery

Clinical Infection and Immunity

Cardiology Research

World Journal of Nephrology and Urology

Cellular and Molecular Medicine Research

Journal of Neurology Research

International Journal of Clinical Pediatrics

AI in Clinical Medicine

Current Translational Medicine

Current Public Health and Epidemiology

Ophthalmology and Eye Health

Clinical Research of Dermatology

Food Sciences and Clinical Nutrition

Current Psychiatry and Mental Health

Current Emergency Medicine

Journal of Current Pharmacology

Current Dentistry and Oral Health

Current Research of Life Sciences

Journal of Sports Medicine Research

Journal of Minimally Invasive Medicine

Plastic Surgery and Aesthetic Medicine

Clinical Geriatric Medicine

Current Occupational Medicine

Journal of Current Surgery, quarterly, ISSN 1927-1298 (print), 1927-1301 (online), published by Elmer Press Inc.                     
The content of this site is intended for health care professionals.
This is an open-access journal distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted
non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Creative Commons Attribution license (Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International CC-BY-NC 4.0)


This journal follows the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals,
the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

website: www.currentsurgery.org   editorial contact: editor@currentsurgery.org    elmer.editorial2@hotmail.com
Address: 9225 Leslie Street, Suite 201, Richmond Hill, Ontario, L4B 3H6, Canada

© Elmer Press Inc. All Rights Reserved.


Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in the published articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the editors and Elmer Press Inc. This website is provided for medical research and informational purposes only and does not constitute any medical advice or professional services. The information provided in this journal should not be used for diagnosis and treatment, those seeking medical advice should always consult with a licensed physician.