MP35-15 ONE-STAGE BUCCAL MUCOSAL GRAFT URETHROPLASTY FOR SECONDARY ANTERIOR URETHRAL STRICTURES FOLLOWING FAILED PRIMARY HYPOSPADIAS REPAIR

Objectives. To evaluate the results of one-stage buccal mucosal urethroplasty in treatment of long urethral strictures. Methods. This retrospective study was carried out on 117 patients with long urethral strictures who underwent one-stage transperineal urethroplasty with dorsally placed buccal mucosal grafts (BMG). Success was defined as no need for any intervention during the follow-up period. Results. Among 117 patients with mean age of 39.55±15.98 years, the strictures were located in penile urethra in 46 patients (39.32%), bulbar urethra in 33 (28.20%) and were panurethral in 38 (32.48%). The etiology of the urethral stricture was sexually transmitted disease (STD) in 17 (14.53%), lichen sclerosus in 15 (12.82%), trauma in 15 (12.82%), catheterization in 13 (11.11%), transurethral resection (TUR) in 6 (5.13%), and unknown in 51 (43.59%). The mean length of strictures was 9.31±2.46 centimeters. During the mean followup of 18.9±6.7 months success rate was 93.94% in bulbar strictures, 97.83% in penile strictures, and 84.21% in panurethral strictures (P value: 0.061). Conclusions. The success rate of transperineal urethroplasty with dorsally placed buccal mucosal grafts is equal in different sites of strictures with different etiologies. So reconstruction of long urethral strictures may be safely and effectively performed at a simple single operative procedure using this method of urethroplasty.

Download Full-text

Buccal mucosal graft urethroplasty for radiation-induced urethral strictures: an evaluation using the extended Urethral Stricture Surgery Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (USS PROM)

World Journal of Urology ◽

10.1007/s00345-020-03102-5 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 38 (11) ◽

pp. 2863-2872 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Malte W. Vetterlein ◽

◽

Luis A. Kluth ◽

Valentin Zumstein ◽

Christian P. Meyer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Radiation Therapy ◽

Urethral Stricture ◽

Outcome Measure ◽

Patient Reported Outcome ◽

Patient Reported Outcome Measure ◽

Urethral Strictures ◽

Buccal Mucosal Graft ◽

Surgery Patient ◽

Patient Reported ◽

Radiation Induced

Abstract Objectives To evaluate objective treatment success and subjective patient-reported outcomes in patients with radiation-induced urethral strictures undergoing single-stage urethroplasty. Patients and methods Monocentric study of patients who underwent single-stage ventral onlay buccal mucosal graft urethroplasty for a radiation-induced stricture between January 2009 and December 2016. Patients were characterized by descriptive analyses. Kaplan–Meier estimates were employed to plot recurrence-free survival. Recurrence was defined as any subsequent urethral instrumentation (dilation, urethrotomy, urethroplasty). Patient-reported functional outcomes were evaluated using the validated German extension of the Urethral Stricture Surgery Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (USS PROM). Results Overall, 47 patients were available for final analyses. Median age was 70 (IQR 65–74). Except for two, all patients had undergone pelvic radiation therapy for prostate cancer. Predominant modality was external beam radiation therapy in 70% of patients. Stricture recurrence rate was 33% at a median follow-up of 44 months (IQR 28–68). In 37 patients with available USS PROM data, mean six-item LUTS score was 7.2 (SD 4.3). Mean ICIQ sum score was 9.8 (SD 5.4). Overall, 53% of patients reported daily leaking and of all, 26% patients underwent subsequent artificial urinary sphincter implantation. Mean IIEF-EF score was 4.4 (SD 7.1), indicating severe erectile dysfunction. In 38 patients with data regarding the generic health status and treatment satisfaction, mean EQ-5D index score and EQ VAS score was 0.91 (SD 0.15) and 65 (SD 21), respectively. Overall, 71% of patients were satisfied with the outcome. Conclusion The success rate and functional outcome after BMGU for radiation-induced strictures were reasonable. However, compared to existing long-term data on non-irradiated patients, the outcome is impaired and patients should be counseled accordingly.

Download Full-text