Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 7295

AbstractCase ReportDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"

Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018

Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."

Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018

Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."

Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
On Sep 2018

Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."

Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata

Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".

Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".

Dr. Mamta Gupta
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018

Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.

Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."

Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
On May 11,2011

Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."

Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
On April 2011

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.

Dr. Anuradha
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Case report
Year : 2011 | Month : February | Volume : 5 | Issue : 1 | Page : 122 - 126 Full Version

The Atypical Presentation Of Multicystic Dysplastic Kidney InNigerian Adults: Two Case Reports

Published: February 1, 2011 | DOI:
Correspondence Address :
Dr. Aremu, Ademola Adegoke
Radiology Department,
Ladoke Akintola University Of Technology
Teaching Hospital,
Osogbo.Osun State.Nigeria.
PHONE NUMBER: +234(0)8034061218


INTRODUCTION: Multicystic dysplastic kidney, an uncommon congenital cystic renal disease, is often diagnosed by prenatal ultrasound in the third trimester of pregnancy or in infancy when it commonly presents as an abdominal mass. The typical presentation in childhood is hypertension and/or abdominal mass. However, to the best of our knowledge, the presentation as an abdominal mass in adulthood has not been previously reported, since the renal mass characteristically regresses and is not detectable by age five. Also, the only two cases of this rare condition which were seen in our centre in the past five years, were not found in foetuses or infants, but were rather found in adults and they presented with abdominal masses rather than the common adulthood presentation of abdominal pain and/or hypertension. The imaging features were also not characteristic of multicystic dysplastic kidney.

CASE PRESENTATION: Both patients were Nigerian females of the Yoruba tribe, from the Southwestern part of Nigeria, with ages fifty-five and twenty-four and they presented with abdominal masses. Also, the imaging features were not characteristic of multicystic dysplastic kidney; though they had cystic renal masses, the cysts were communicating.The diagnosis was eventually made on the basis of histology after nephrectomy.

CONCLUSION: Multicystic dysplastic kidney should be considered as one of the differential diagnoses of renal /abdominal masses in adults. Also, all communicating centrally located renal cysts are not dilated calyces.These facts should be noted by urologists and radiologists.

Multicystic dysplastic kidney (MCDK) is a non genetic, congenital, cystic renal disease in which the cortex is replaced by numerous cysts of multiple sizes. The term multicystic and polycystic were used interchangeably before until 1955, when Spence stressed that the terms were different entities.

MCDK is typically a unilateral disorder, since the bilateral condition is not compatible with extra-uterine life. Although MCDK is unilateral, the contralateral kidney has an increased incidence of congenital anomalies which may be mild or as severe as renal agenesis, which is also not compatible with life. It has an incidence of 1 in 4,300 (for unilateral MCDK) and 1 in 10,000 (for bilateral MCKD) live births and a male to female ratio of 2:1 (for unilateral MCKD).It presents as an abdominal mass in neonates and infants, if not diagnosed by prenatal ultrasound and reported to regress and become undetectable even by imaging by five years of age.

The two cases of Multicystic dysplastic kidneys which were seen at our centre in five years, were not children, but adults with an unusual presentation. We hereby discuss these cases and review the relevant literature.

Case Report

Case A was a 55yr old female teacher who was referred from a secondary health care centre to a urologist with a 15 years history of recurrent, severe, dull ache in the right loin and a 4 months history of progressive right sided abdominal swelling.

There was no history of haematuria or facial or pedal swelling, no change in urinary flow and no history of jaundice or haematochezia. There was a positive history of weight loss.

Physical examination revealed a middle aged woman, afebrile, not pale, anicteric, well hydrated and with no pedal oedema.

However, there was a persistent elevation of blood pressure which varied between 170/110 and 190/140mmHg.The central nervous and the pulmonary systems were normal.
Abdominal examination revealed a firm, ballotable, non tender, slightly mobile, right lumbar mass with well defined edges. The percussion over the mass was resonant.

An initial clinical diagnosis of right renal tumour with secondary hypertension was made.
The full blood count, platelet count, estimation of electrolytes and urea with creatinine, chest radiograph, urinalysis, echocardiography and liver function tests were all within normal limits.

The abdominal ultrasound (Table/Fig 1) revealed a markedly enlarged, non calcified, right kidney measuring 16.0x7.2cm in the bipolar and the anteroposterior diameters, which was filled with moderately to markedly dilated communicating cystic lesions with no definite parenchymal tissue .The liver, spleen, and left kidney were normal. No cysts were seen in the liver, spleen, pancreas and the left kidney. However, the renal pelvis and the ureter were not demonstrable. There was no ascites.
A diagnosis of severe hydronephrosis, secondary to pelviureteric junction obstruction, was made.

The preliminary film of an intravenous urography which was done revealed a soft tissue mass in the right lumbar region. However, there was no excretion from the right kidney after 48 hours, while the left kidney, the left ureter and the urinary bladder were within normal limits.
An enhanced abdominal CT was done (Table/Fig 2); the scannogram showed a right cystic lumbar mass with no evidence of calcification. Serial axial cuts revealed normal liver, spleen, pancreas and left kidney. A ring calcification due to atherosclerosis from hypertension and aging was seen in the abdominal aorta.

The serial axial cuts and the saggital and the coronal reformats revealed multiple, dilated, non- enhancing, communicating, cystic, right kidney masses, with no renal parenchyma seen. The right ureter and the pelvis were not demonstrated. There was no calcification within the mass. The left ureter and the urinary bladder were normal.

The diagnosis which was then made, still was of hydronephrotic right kidney, with a differential diagnosis of multicystic kidney disease.

Urethrocystocopy revealed normal urethra and bladder mucosa. The left ureteric orifice was observed and was found to be normal, while the right ureteric orifice was not seen or cannulated.

She was placed on antihypertensives to control the blood pressure and was prepared for laparotomy.

The operative findings included: a cystic, right kidney mass measuring 14x10x6cm, with absent right ureter and friable right adrenal; a hypertrophied left kidney with normal texture and consistency; other abdominal organs were normal. The right renal mass was completely removed and was sent for histology.

The post operative period was uneventful and the PCV before discharge was 34%; the average blood pressure (without antihypertensives) was 140/90mmHg. She was discharged on the 7th day, post operation. The histology reports confirmed a diagnosis of multicystic dysplastic kidney.

Case B was a 24 year old polytechnic student who was referred to the Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospitals’ complex from a private hospital on account of septicaemia. Her presenting complaints were a left sided abdominal mass of two years’ duration, which became painful two weeks before presentation, with associated fever. There was a history of nausea but no vomiting. There was no history of haematuria, jaundice, facial or pedal swelling; nor was there any change in urine flow or weight loss. She had to be referred to the teaching hospital because she was not responding to the treatment.

On examination, she was found to be a young lady who was acutely ill-looking, pale, anicteric, febrile, and dehydrated, but was not in any obvious distress. Her blood pressure was 120/80 mmHg and her pulse rate was 90beats/min. Her abdominal examination revealed a firm, ballotable, tender, mobile, left lumbar mass with well defined margins. The other systems which were reviewed were essentially normal.

A provisional diagnosis of an abdominal mass was made and laboratory investigations and abdominal ultrasound were requested.

The PCV was 24%, with a raised WBC count. The platelet count, electrolytes, urea, creatinine and urinalysis were all normal.

Abdominal ultrasound (Table/Fig 3) revealed an enlarged, non calcified, left kidney measuring 16cm x 7cm in its bipolar and anteroposterior diameters, with multiple communicating cysts of varying sizes. No normal renal parenchyma tissue was seen. The renal pelvis and the ureter were not visualized. In addition, the numerous cysts contained fine internal echoes. The liver, gallbladder, pancreas, spleen and the right kidney were normal. There was no ascites. A diagnosis of cystic renal mass with infection or bleeding into the cyst was made.
An emergency intravenous urography was ordered for to ascertain the functional state of the kidneys. The plain film revealed a soft tissue density mass in the left lumbar region, which displaced the bowel loops to the right. No calcification was seen. Contrast films showed no excretion from the left kidney after 48 hours, while the right renal outline was faintly demonstrated because of poor bowel preparation. The right renal pelvis was baggy and extrarenal (Table/Fig 4). The right ureter was normal, while the left ureter was not visualized. The urinary bladder was within normal limits.

Emergency surgery (laparotomy) was done. At surgery, an enlarged left kidney was found, which contained multiple cysts which were filled with pus. The left ureter was atretic. A total of 550ml of pus was drained before the left nephrectomy was done. The specimen was sent for histology.
The patient was transfused with two pints of blood before discharge on the 7th post-operation day.

Histopathological tests confirmed a diagnosis of multicystic dysplastic kidney.


Multicystic dysplastic kidney (MCDK) is a non genetic, congenital, cystic renal disease in which the cortex is replaced by numerous cysts of multiple sizes.

The terms ‘multicystic’ and ‘polycystic’ were used interchangeably until 1955, when Spence stressed that the two terms were different entities (1).

The cysts were anchored by the dysplastic parenchymal and the arrangement was said to resemble a bunch of grapes; with the calyceal drainage system often absent.

MCDK is typically a unilateral disorder; the bilateral condition is not compatible with extrauterine survival. Furthermore, the appearance of MCDK with contralateral renal agenesis does not support life. The two patients had unilateral MCDK with normal contralateral kidneys.

The renal size (in MCDK) varies from slightly less than normal to enormous, filling most of the abdomen; the cysts may even be small (microscopic) with predominating stroma – this condition is referred to as solid cystic dysplasia. The hydronephrotic form of multicystic kidney is diagnosed when an identifiable renal pelvis is seen in association with what appears to be a multicystic kidney. The renal pelvis was not identified in any of the imaging modalities which were used to assess these patients.

Competing theories for the aetiology of MCDK have been proposed. Felsen and Gussen (1975) suggested that multicystic kidney is an extreme form of hydronephrosis which is secondary to atresia of the ureter or the renal pelvis. The fact that the left kidney is more often affected, supports this view, because the kidney is often associated with the primary obstructive megaureter and ureteropelvic junction obstruction (2); only one of our cases had a left sided lesion.

This hypothesis was confirmed in some animals by ligating the ureter at various points of gestation. Although it is found to be effective when the ligation took place in the first trimester, it however induced dysplasia and not multicystic dysplastic kidney.

Congenital renal dysplasia may also be explained by an abnormal induction of the metanephric blastaema by the migrating ureteric bud. Disruption in this molecular interaction can produce congenital anomalies which are similar to MCDK or other forms of renal dysplasia.
One of the most recent explanations is that dysplastic renal tubules are poorly branched derivatives of the ureteric bud that terminate in the cystic bud. It is therefore possible that the mutation of ICAL –I, a transcript that is expressed in the embryonic human central nervous system and the urinary tract, can generate renal dysplasia as well as agenesis (3).
Exposure to teratogens and some genetic mutations have been reported as the causes and are found to be associated with syndromes like Brachio-oto-renal, Renal-coloboma (4), 49XXXX , Alagile and Beckwith Weilderman.

Several forms of MCDK have been described. Both the classic type and the less common hydronephrotic type have cysts of various sizes which are connected by loose, insubstantial fibrous tissues. No functional renal tissue is identifiable. The classic type has a random configuration of cysts, whereas the latter variant presents with a discernible, dilated renal pelvis which is surrounded by cystic structures. The third condition is known as solid cystic dysplasia –made up of small cysts with a greater amount of non functional parenchyma. The discussed cases were not likely to be of the classic type, as no renal pelvis was identified, neither was a solid renal parenchymal seen.

Although the pathogenetic process leading to a multicystic kidney disease begins at the 8th week in utero, the mean age at the time of the antenatal diagnosis is about 28 weeks, with a range of 21 to 35 weeks (5).

In newborns, MCDK remains as one of the commonest causes of an abdominal mass and is also a common cause of a palpable abdominal mass in neonates (second only to hydronephrosis). Other differential diagnoses include uteropelvic junction obstruction, renal dysplasia secondary to obstructive disorders, hypodysplasia(of a duplex kidney),multilocular cystic nephroma (6) and even infantile onset autosomal recessive polycystic kidney disease, depending on the variants of MCKD.

The three main characteristics of MCDK, namely the presence of multiple, non communicating cysts of varying sizes, the dysplastic renal parenchymal and the absence of a normal pelvicalyceal system, may not always be present because there are three types or variants of MCDK (classic, hydronephrotic, and solid cystic dysplasia) (7). The non demonstration of the other two characteristic features in our patients is due to the fact that they are most probably of the commonest classic variant, and also because of the non availability of radionuclide (DMSA renal scintigraphy and DTPA diuretic renal scan) as well as Magnetic resonance imaging at our centre.

G.T. Rottenberg et al (8) did a retrospective study on sixty six children with a radiological diagnosis of multicystic kidney disease. The change in size which was demonstrated on sonograms was examined. Only fifty children had adequate follow-up over 32 months. It was concluded that multicystic kidney undergoes partial or complete involution over the first two years of life, because 40 out of the 55 kidneys showed reduction in size – these include 22 which were no longer detectable by ultrasound.

The less severely affected patients present in adulthood during the evaluation for abdominal pain, haematuria and hypertension. It rarely presents as an abdominal mass in this age group, but rather, with the incidental finding of one or more curvilinear calcifications in the renal area. Infection and pain are some of the other modes of presentation. This condition is more likely to be found on the left and is slightly more common in males. Our two patients presented with an abdominal mass, with hypertension and infection as complications in cases A and B respectively. There was no calcification.

Although MCDK is often unilateral since the bilateral condition is not compatible with extrauterine survival , the opposite kidney has an increased incidence of congenital anomalies like ureteropelvic junction obstruction or ureteral anomalies in as many as 30-41% of the patients (9). No anomaly was seen in the contralateral kidney in A, while B had an extrarenal pelvis in the right kidney.

Atiyeh B et al found the contralateral abnormalities to be commoner than the unilateral abnormalities and the most common contralateral genitourinary tract anomaly which was found in their study was vesicoureteric reflux, which was seen in 18% of the patients (10). It is important to diagnose this to prevent acquired renal damage in the solitary functional unit. Reflux may occur in the ipsilateral ureter in a few cases.

MCDK can be found in the upper or lower pole of a duplicated kidney, or on one side of a horse- shoe kidney.

Other associated findings in the contralateral kidney, apart from pelvic ureteric junction obstruction, are other obstructive uropathies like uretero vesical junction obstruction, ureteral ectopia, and ureterocoele.

Ultrasonography is generally the first study which is performed, especially in neonates and infants. It is fast and accurate and does not require sedation, radiation or other interventions. It is useful for prenatal diagnosis and for post delivery monitoring.

Sonography should also be the first line of study in a symptomatic presentation, such as a palpable abdominal mass, abdominal pain, incontinence and recurrent urinary tract infections. It also provides clues to other urinary tract anomalies, as well as to intra-abdominal or retroperitoneal malignancies.

Classic MCDK appears as multiple, non communicating cysts of varying sizes, which completely replace the parenchymal, as observed by ultrasound. No renal pelvis or calyces are seen. The kidney is markedly enlarged at birth, but may progressively shrink to a small nubbin that commonly calcifies. (11),(12)

In the hydronephrotic form, dilated renal pelvis and calyces are identifiable with multiple cysts of varying sizes, replacing most, but not all, of the renal parenchymal. Islands of heterogenous dysplastic solid renal tissue are also seen (13).

Atypical forms of MCDK include a single or few large cysts replacing the kidney.
In few cases, it is impossible to differentiate hydronephrosis from MCDK, although if renal pelvis cannot be identified, multicystic dysplasia is the likely diagnosis (14). Hydronephrosis was the first radiological diagnosis in both patients because of their ages and the communicating cystic renal masses.

In these difficult cases, radionuclide imaging may be helpful by showing some function by hydronephrotic kidneys on a DMSA (dimercaptosuccinic acid) scan, whereas renal concentration is seldom seen in multicystic kidney (11),(12),(13). The radionuclide imaging facility is however not available at our centre and therefore it could not be utilized.

Radionuclide imaging is superior to intravenous pyelography in children, in differentiating hydronephrotic kidney from MCDK (especially hydronephrotic form). Apart from DMSA; MAG-3 (technetium 99m mercaptoacetyltriglyceride) will demonstrate a lack of function (MCDK) and also provide information regarding the drainage in an obstructed hydronephrotic kidney.

However, a limitation of radionuclide imaging is the relatively poor renal function in the first month of life; the study is therefore usually postponed until 1 month of age, to avoid false- positive results.

Also, any lesion that impairs renal circulation, such as renal artery stenosis and renal vein thrombosis, will reveal the kidney as non- functioning, on a nuclear renogram.

Angiography will also reveal an absent or small renal artery in the multicystic dysplastic kidney, though it is rarely indicated.

Cystoscopy may reveal a hemitrigone and absent ureteral orifice on the affected side; however, when an orifice is present retrograde ureterography will often demonstrate ureteral atresia. The ureteral orifice was absent on the affected right side in these patients and retrograde catheterization was not possible.

Voiding cystourethrography is also recommended as a routine procedure in children with MCDK, due to a high frequency of lower urinary tract abnormalities. B Karmazyn et al (14), in a study on 59 children, found that 32% of them had one or more abnormalities of the lower urinary tract, which included vesicoureteric reflux, ectopic ureters, ureterocoele, hypospadias, opacification of a small utricle and ejaculatory duct reflux.

Intravenous urography (I.V.U.) may show two or more curvilinear calcifications in the renal area on a plain film. A soft tissue mass in the lumbar region, displacing the bowels, may also be seen. The contrast films may show a non excretory affected kidney. It may also demonstrate coexisting urinary tract anomalies like ectopic ureters, ureterocoele, etc.

Computerized Tomography scan and magnetic resonance imaging are not part of the routine algorithms in the diagnosis of MCDK. CT may however show calcification in the renal region; multicystic mass with little or no parenchyma and non excretion after intravenous contrast administration. Case A had CT, but the mases though cystic, were not calcified.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) may show similar findings as those revealed by the computerized tomography scan and may also be able to show the little dysplastic parenchyma that may be missed by ultrasound and CT, because of its superior soft tissue resolution. It is also useful in the early detection of cancer, as the follow up of the patients is not surgically managed.

Voiding cystourethrography is indicated for the evaluation of vesicoureteric reflux, especially in children with a duplex collecting system, while DMSA renal scintigraphy can evaluate renal functions in the normal kidney, both portions of a segmental MCDK and the compressed parenchyma(by cystic dysplasia) in classical MCDK (6). The DTPA diuretic renal scan can demonstrate the drainage of the hydronephrotic variant (6).
The management of MCDK is a controversial topic that presents the physicians and the surgeons with a significant dilemma.

Those advocating conservative management with a six monthly follow-up by sonograms based their reasoning on the fact that disappearance of MCDK is demonstrated clinically and on ultrasound in most patients by 5 years of age (15). However, the resolution of the cysts on ultrasonography or the disappearance of the mass clearly does not equate with the resolution of the risk of hypertension, as significant stromal tissue may still be present (16).

The risk of hypertension alone is such that the conservative management of MCDK should entail lifelong follow-up with regular blood pressure assessment.

The other major complication of MCDK is malignancy. Malignancy includes Wilm’s tumour, adenocarcinomas and embryonal tumours. These tumours develop in patients of various ages (Wilm’s tumours in children and adenocarcinomas at ages of 15, 26 and 68 years), thus confirming the need for a lifelong follow up of conservatively managed patients. The development of hypertension and abdominal pain in case A; pyelonephritis with septicaemia in case B, as well as an unsure diagnosis and chances of malignancy in both the patients, necessitated the surgical management.

Most studies reported a low incidence of malignant transformation in MCDK; while this risk may seem to be small, there are considerable difficulties which are associated with its early detection. These include the significant regression in the size of the MCDKs, leading to the disappearance of the kidneys on ultrasound, thus preventing the early detection of the tumour growth in the stromal tissue and a high incidence of ureteral atresia which precludes early detection by either urine cytology or the development of macroscopic haematuria.

An early discharge from follow up is clearly not indicated, given the available information above. Also, there is no clear recommendation about how frequently the ultrasound should be performed, the huge financial costs and the demanding follow up of a seemingly asymptomatic child, as well as about the little or no perioperative complications of surgery (nephrectomy); these made surgical intervention the valid and cheaper option (17).


Two cases of multicystic dysplastic kidney, presenting as an abdominal mass in adults, had been discussed. The ultrasound features were also not characteristic. We also reviewed the relevant published articles. We observed that there was no consensus on nephrectomy as the choice of treatment in a paediatric uncomplicated renal mass.


Griscom NT, Vawter F.G, Fellers FX: Pelvi- infundibular atresia: The usual form of multicystic kidney; 44 unilateral and two bilateral cases. Semin Roentgens 1975:10:125.
Glassberg KI: The dilated ureter: Classification and approach. Urology 1977; 9:1.
Woolf AS, Winyard PJD. Advances in the cell biology and genetics of human kidney malformations J. Am. Soc. Nephrology. 1998; 9: 1114-1125.
David S H,Carlton M B,Susan I et al:Management and etiology of unilateral multicystic dysplastic kidney: a review.Paediatric nephrology (2009)24:233-241.
Avni E, Thova Y, Lalmard B, et al; Multicystic dysplastic kidney. Natural history from in utero diagnosis and post natal follow up. J. Urol 1987; 138: 1420.
Chun chen Lin,Jeng-DewTsai,Jin-cheng Sheu et al.Journal of Paediatric Surgery Vol 45,Issue 9, September 2010,Pg 1856-1862.
Glassberg K.I.,Stephens F.D.,Lebowitz R.L.,Renal dysgenesis and cystic diseaseof the kidney:a report of the committee on Terminology,Nomenclature and classification,section on Urology,American Academy of Paediatrics,J.Urol (1987),pp 1085-1092.
Rottenberg G.T., Gordon I and R De Bruyn. The natural history of the multicystic dysplastic kidney in children. BJR 1997; Vol 70 Issue 832; 347 – 350.
Kliener B., Filly RA, Mack L et al Multicystic Dysplastic kidney; observations of contralateral disease in fetal population. Radiology 1986 161: 27-29.
Atiyeh B, Husmann D, Baum M.Contralateral renal abnormalties in multicystic dysplastic kidney disease. Pediatr 1992 Jul; 121(1):65-7.
Hayden CJ, Swischuk L. Renal cystic disease. Semin ultrasound, CT MR 1991; 12: 361- 373.
Strife JL, Sonza AS, Kirks DR, et al, Multicystic dysplastic kidney in children: USS follow up. Radiology 1993; 186: 705 – 788.
Fong EF, Rahman MR, Rose T, et al. Fetal renal cystic disease: sonographic- pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1986; 146:767.
Karmezyn B, Zerin J.M. Lower urinary tract abnormality in children with multicystic dysplastic kidney. Radiology 1997, Vol 203, 223-226.
Angelmeier KW, Kay R, Levin H. Hypertension as a complication of multicystic dysplastic kidney Urology1992; 39; 55- 58.
Gough DCS, Postlethwaite RJ, Lewis M. A et al Multicystic renal dysplasia diagnosed in the antenatal period – a note of caution. Br. J. Urol 1995; 76: 244- 248.
Webb N.J.A, Lewis M.A., Bruce J et al. unilateral multicystic dysplastic kidney: the case for nephrectomy. Arch Dis. Child. 1997; 76: 31- 34.

DOI and Others


JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)