Proximal Urethrostomy Versus Urethroplasty for Complex Urethral Strictures

被引:1
作者
Rahav, Nir J. [1 ,4 ]
Udah, Mohamad [2 ]
Cohen, Sarit [2 ]
Bdolah-Abram, Tali [3 ]
Chertin, Boris [2 ]
Shenfeld, Ofer Z. [1 ]
机构
[1] Shaare Zedek Med Ctr, Ctr Reconstruct & Funct Urol, Jerusalem, Israel
[2] Shaare Zedek Med Ctr, Dept Urol, Jerusalem, Israel
[3] Hebrew Univ Jerusalem, Med Sch, Jerusalem, Israel
[4] Shaare Zedek Med Ctr, Ctr Reconstruct & Funct Urol, 12 Shmuel Bait St, IL-9103102 Jerusalem, Israel
来源
EUROPEAN UROLOGY OPEN SCIENCE | 2024年 / 62卷
关键词
Patient-reported outcome; measures; Perineal urethrostomy; Urethral stricture; Urethroplasty; TOOL;
D O I
10.1016/j.euros.2024.02.008
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: The optimal treatment for complex urethral stricture (CUS) is yet to be determined. Comparisons of methods based on validated questionnaires or objective outcome measures are lacking. Objective: To compare proximal urethrostomy and urethroplasty for CUS using objective measures and validated questionnaires, and to evaluate trends in subgroups of patients who underwent proximal urethrostomy as the intended definitive treatment versus first-stage urethroplasty. Design, setting, and participants: We identified all patients who underwent proximal urethrostomy at our center from 2004 to 2021. The control group comprised patients who underwent urethroplasty for CUS (strictures >6 cm, recurrent posturethroplasty strictures, or CUS due to lichen sclerosus or past hypospadias surgery). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary outcome was a recurrent stricture at a minimal follow-up of 1 yr. The secondary outcomes included validated questionnaires, uroflowmetry, and residual urine volume. Survival was compared by a Kaplan -Meier analysis. Results and limitations: The study included 57 proximal urethrostomy and 75 urethroplasty patients. Results for these two groups were as follows: the cumulative incidence of stricture recurrence over a median follow-up of 46 mo was 22.6% for proximal urethrostomy versus 36.2% for urethroplasty ( p = 0.106); no statistically significant differences were observed between groups in terms of postoperative quality of urination or life, satisfaction with outcome, and erectile function. Both groups had a significant improvement in urinary flow after surgery (19.65 vs 20.29 ml/s), with no difference between the groups ( p = 0.796); the proximal urethrostomy group had a significant improvement in postvoid residual after surgery, but there was no difference between the groups in the last follow-up visit (79.16 vs 52.03 ml; p = 0.245). A subgroup analysis of the proximal urethrostomy group showed no significant differences in cumulative primary or secondary outcomes. Limitations included the retrospective design and the relatively small study population. Conclusions: Comparisons of the two groups revealed no significant differences in stricture recurrence, results of validated questionnaires, or objective measures of urination. Patient summary: Proximal urethrostomy is equivalent to urethral reconstruction, and it should be offered as a viable solution for complex urethral stricture. (c) 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Association of Urology. This is an open access article under the CC BY -NC -ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:91 / 98
页数:8
相关论文
共 18 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2019, 39 ANN ISR UR ASS C
  • [2] Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Urethral Reconstruction
    Baradaran, Nima
    Hampson, Lindsay A.
    Edwards, Todd C.
    Voelzke, Bryan B.
    Breyer, Benjamin N.
    [J]. CURRENT UROLOGY REPORTS, 2018, 19 (07)
  • [3] Clinical Outcome and Quality of Life Assessment in Patients Treated With Perineal Urethrostomy for Anterior Urethral Stricture Disease
    Barbagli, Guido
    De Angelis, Michele
    Romano, Giuseppe
    Lazzeri, Massimo
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2009, 182 (02) : 548 - 557
  • [4] Multivariate Analysis of Risk Factors for Long-Term Urethroplasty Outcome
    Breyer, Benjamin N.
    McAninch, Jack W.
    Whitson, Jared M.
    Eisenberg, Michael L.
    Mehdizadeh, Jennifer F.
    Myers, Jeremy B.
    Voelzke, Bryan B.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2010, 183 (02) : 613 - 617
  • [5] The day-to-day variation (test-retest reliability) of residual urine measurement
    Dunsmuir, WD
    Feneley, M
    Corry, DA
    Bryan, J
    Kirby, RS
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1996, 77 (02): : 192 - 193
  • [6] Changing Trends in Reconstruction of Complex Anterior Urethral Strictures: From Skin Flap to Perineal Urethrostomy
    Fuchs, Joceline S.
    Shakir, Nabeel
    Mckibben, Maxim J.
    Scott, Jeremy M.
    Viers, Boyd
    Pagliara, Travis
    Morey, Allen F.
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2018, 122 : 169 - 173
  • [7] Defining a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Urethral Stricture Surgery
    Jackson, Matthew J.
    Sciberras, John
    Mangera, Altaf
    Brett, Andrew
    Watkin, Nick
    N'Dow, James M. O.
    Chapple, Christopher R.
    Andrich, Daniela E.
    Pickard, Robert S.
    Mundy, Anthony R.
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2011, 60 (01) : 60 - 68
  • [8] Urethroplasty for failed hypospadias repair: A matched cohort analysis
    Lumen, Nicolaas
    Hoebeke, Piet
    Deschepper, Ellen
    Van Laecke, Erik
    De Caestecker, Karel
    Oosterlinck, Willem
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC UROLOGY, 2011, 7 (02) : 170 - 173
  • [9] Urethroplasty for urethral strictures: Quality assessment of an in-home algorithm
    Lumen, Nicolaas
    Hoebeke, Piet
    Oosterlinck, Willem
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2010, 17 (02) : 167 - 174
  • [10] Meeks JJ, 2009, J UROLOGY, V182, P1266, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2009.06.027