Renoprotective effect of platelet-rich plasma in obstructive uropathy

Özsoy E., KUTLUHAN M. A., Akyüz M., Tokuç E., Ürkmez A., Gümrükçü G., ...More

International Urology and Nephrology, vol.53, no.6, pp.1073-1079, 2021 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 53 Issue: 6
  • Publication Date: 2021
  • Doi Number: 10.1007/s11255-021-02782-1
  • Journal Name: International Urology and Nephrology
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, BIOSIS, EMBASE, Gender Studies Database, MEDLINE
  • Page Numbers: pp.1073-1079
  • Keywords: Hydronephrosis, Nephropathy, Platelet-rich plasma, Scintigraphy, Ureteral obstruction
  • Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University Affiliated: Yes


© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. part of Springer Nature.Purpose: To investigate the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in reducing renal injury in ureteral obstruction. Methods: Twenty-four Wistar Albino rats were randomized and divided into four groups as the donor (n = 6), sham (n = 6), saline (n = 6), and PRP (n = 6). Blood was obtained from the donor group by cardiac puncture and PRP was prepared. 2 cc blood was sampled from other groups to measure blood-urea nitrogen and creatinine levels. Baseline renal scintigraphy was performed. An abdominal midline incision was made and the left ureter was exposed in the sham group. Saline infusion was given to the kidneys of the saline group after left ureteral obstruction, while PRP was given to the PRP group. On postoperative Day 7, control biochemical and scintigraphic evaluations were performed and left nephrectomies were done. Left kidneys were evaluated histopathologically. Results: DMSA measurements in the sham group were found to be significantly higher than the saline and PRP groups (p = 0.001 and p = 0.024, respectively). There were no significant differences between the saline and PRP groups (p = 0.525 and p > 0.05, respectively). Histopathologically, no significant difference was observed between the saline and PRP groups (p = 0.320), while the scores of the sham group were significantly higher than the saline and PRP groups (p = 0.02 and p = 0.001, respectively). Conclusion: Our study results suggest that PRP may be effective in preventing ureteral obstruction-induced renal injury.