ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
Conservative versus invasive management of symptomatic hydronephrosis in pregnancy: maternal and fetal outcomes.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe management of symptomatic hydronephrosis during pregnancy requires balancing maternal and fetal health. This exploratory retrospective study evaluated outcomes of conservative versus invasive intervention approaches in pregnant patients with symptomatic hydronephrosis.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of pregnant patients with symptomatic hydronephrosis who underwent conservative management or invasive interventions. Groups were compared regarding demographics, gestational age at diagnosis, fetal birth weight, maternal renal function, and pregnancy-related complications.
resultsThe conservative (n = 52) and invasive intervention (n = 29) groups had comparable baseline characteristics, including maternal age (25.8 ± 4.7 vs. 27.0 ± 4.9 years, p = 0.290) and gestational age at diagnosis (24.1 ± 5.9 vs. 24.8 ± 5.8 weeks, p = 0.610). Birth weight was significantly higher with conservative management (3,289 ± 531 g vs. 3,045 ± 337 g, p = 0.029). Multivariable regression analysis adjusting for maternal age, gestational week, and gravidity showed no significant independent association with birth weight (β = 167.5 g, 95% CI: -55.5-390.5 g, p = 0.139), with the most significant difference observed in Grade 3 hydronephrosis (654 g, p = 0.055). Serum BUN levels were lower with invasive intervention (6.9 ± 1.0 vs. 7.5 ± 1.1 mg/dL, p = 0.020), though serum creatinine, a more specific renal function marker, showed no significant difference (p = 0.836). Rates of gestational hypertension and preeclampsia were comparable between groups.
conclusionBoth conservative and invasive management strategies appear feasible and clinically acceptable for symptomatic hydronephrosis during pregnancy, with no clinically significant differences in maternal or neonatal outcomes. Although a statistically significant difference in birth weight was observed, neonatal outcomes, including Apgar scores, were comparable between groups, and birth weights did not fall into categories of small for gestational age or fetal growth restriction. Invasive procedures may be necessary in severe cases with refractory symptoms, infection, or deteriorating renal function. Treatment selection should be individualized based on clinical severity rather than expected outcome differences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.