Abstract
Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare urethroplasty using onlay pedicled transverse skin flap (PSF) versus one-stage inlay buccal mucosa graft (BMG) in repair of penile urethral strictures. Methods: We conducted a prospective matched-pair analysis of 44 male patients receiving penile urethroplasty between June 2016 and June 2019. There were 22 patients who received PSF and 22 patients who received BMG. Matching was performed according to stricture length. Patients with strictures caused by lichen sclerosus, prior hypospadias repair, or failed prior urethroplasty were excluded. Treatment was considered successful if no recurrence was observed. Successful repair, complication rates, patients’ satisfaction, and quality of life improvement were endpoints of this study. Results: Mean follow-up was 40.3 months. PSF and BMG showed comparable success rates (90.9% vs. 86.4%, p = 0.713). Recurrent stricture occurred in 2 patients (9.1%) who received PSF and in 3 patients (13.6%) who received BMG. Operation time was significantly longer for PSF than for BMG (108.4 min vs. 78.1 min, p = 0.01). Univariable logistic regression analysis revealed no relevant risk factors for stricture recurrence. Conclusion: Early results indicate comparable success rates of PSF and BMG in penile urethroplasty. Further studies with larger sample size and longer follow-up periods are required to evaluate subtle differences between both techniques.
References
1.
Mundy
AR
, Andrich
DE
. Urethral strictures
. BJU Int
. 2011 Jan
;107
(1
):6
–26
.2.
Levy
ME
, Elliott
SP
. Graft use in bulbar urethroplasty
. Urol Clin North Am
. 2017 Feb
;44
(1
):39
–47
.3.
Abrate
A
, Gregori
A
, Simonato
A
. Lingual mucosal graft urethroplasty 12 years later: systematic review and meta-analysis
. Asian J Urol
. 2019 Jul
;6
(3
):230
–41
.4.
Simonato
A
, Gregori
A
. Lingual mucosal grafts for anterior urethroplasty: a review
. BJU Int
. 2010 Jan
;105
(1
):132
–3
.5.
Jordan
GH
. Scrotal and perineal flaps for anterior urethral reconstruction
. Urol Clin North Am
. 2002 May
;29
(2
):411
–6
; viii. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0094-0143(02)00030-7.6.
Manoj
B
, Sanjeev
N
, Pandurang
PN
, Jaideep
M
, Ravi
M
. Postauricular skin as an alternative to oral mucosa for anterior onlay graft urethroplasty: a preliminary experience in patients with oral mucosa changes
. Urology
. 2009 Aug
;74
(2
):345
–8
.7.
Kinkead
TM
, Borzi
PA
, Duffy
PG
, Ransley
PG
. Long-term followup of bladder mucosa graft for male urethral reconstruction
. J Urol
. 1994 Apr
;151
(4
):1056
–8
.8.
Xu
YM
, Qiao
Y
, Sa
YL
, Zhang
J
, Fu
Q
, Song
LJ
. Urethral reconstruction using colonic mucosa graft for complex strictures
. J Urol
. 2009 Sep
;182
(3
):1040
–3
.9.
Horiguchi
A
. Substitution urethroplasty using oral mucosa graft for male anterior urethral stricture disease: current topics and reviews
. Int J Urol
. 2017 Jul
;24
(7
):493
–503
.10.
Dubey
D
, Vijjan
V
, Kapoor
R
, Srivastava
A
, Mandhani
A
, Kumar
A
, . Dorsal onlay buccal mucosa versus penile skin flap urethroplasty for anterior urethral strictures: results from a randomized prospective trial
. J Urol
. 2007 Dec
;178
(6
):2466
–9
.11.
Fu
Q
, Zhang
Y
, Zhang
J
, Xie
H
, Sa
YL
, Jin
S
. Substitution urethroplasty for anterior urethral stricture repair: comparison between lingual mucosa graft and pedicled skin flap
. Scand J Urol
. 2017 Dec
;51
(6
):479
–83
.12.
Soliman
MG
, Abo Farha
M
, El Abd
AS
, Abdel Hameed
H
, El Gamal
S
. Dorsal onlay urethroplasty using buccal mucosa graft versus penile skin flap for management of long anterior urethral strictures: a prospective randomized study
. Scand J Urol
. 2014 Oct
;48
(5
):466
–73
.13.
Hussein
MM
, Almogazy
H
, Mamdouh
A
, Farag
F
, Rashed
E
, Gamal
W
, . Urethroplasty for treatment of long anterior urethral stricture: buccal mucosa graft versus penile skin graft-does the stricture length matter
. Int Urol Nephrol
. 2016 Nov
;48
(11
):1831
–5
.14.
Sharma
G
, Sharma
S
, Parmar
K
. Buccal mucosa or penile skin for substitution urethroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
. Indian J Urol
. 2020 Apr–Jun
;36
(2
):81
–8
.15.
Lumen
N
, Oosterlinck
W
, Hoebeke
P
. Urethral reconstruction using buccal mucosa or penile skin grafts: systematic review and meta-analysis
. Urol Int
. 2012
;89
(4
):387
–94
.16.
Asopa
HS
, Garg
M
, Singhal
GG
, Singh
L
, Asopa
J
, Nischal
A
. Dorsal free graft urethroplasty for urethral stricture by ventral sagittal urethrotomy approach
. Urology
. 2001 Nov
;58
(5
):657
–9
.17.
McAninch
JW
. Reconstruction of extensive urethral strictures: circular fasciocutaneous penile flap
. J Urol
. 1993 Mar
;149
(3
):488
–91
.18.
Faris
SF
, Myers
JB
, Voelzke
BB
, Elliott
SP
, Breyer
BN
, Vanni
AJ
, . Assessment of the male urethral reconstruction learning curve
. Urology
. 2016 Mar
;89
:137
–42
.19.
Breyer
BN
, McAninch
JW
, Whitson
JM
, Eisenberg
ML
, Mehdizadeh
JF
, Myers
JB
, . Multivariate analysis of risk factors for long-term urethroplasty outcome
. J Urol
. 2010 Feb
;183
(2
):613
–7
.20.
Wood
DN
, Allen
SE
, Andrich
DE
, Greenwell
TJ
, Mundy
AR
. The morbidity of buccal mucosal graft harvest for urethroplasty and the effect of nonclosure of the graft harvest site on postoperative pain
. J Urol
. 2004 Aug
;172
(2
):580
–3
.21.
Dublin
N
, Stewart
LH
. Oral complications after buccal mucosal graft harvest for urethroplasty
. BJU Int
. 2004 Oct
;94
(6
):867
–9
.22.
Warner
JN
, Malkawi
I
, Dhradkeh
M
, Joshi
PM
, Kulkarni
SB
, Lazzeri
M
, . A multi-institutional evaluation of the management and outcomes of long-segment urethral strictures
. Urology
. 2015 Jun
;85
(6
):1483
–7
.23.
Kulkarni
SB
, Joshi
PM
, Venkatesan
K
. Management of panurethral stricture disease in India
. J Urol
. 2012 Sep
;188
(3
):824
–30
.24.
Furr
JR
, Wisenbaugh
ES
, Gelman
J
. Long-term outcomes for 2-stage urethroplasty: an analysis of risk factors for urethral stricture recurrence
. World J Urol
. 2021 Oct
;39
(10
):3903
–11
.25.
Pallares-Méndez
R
, Cota-Agüero
JA
, Gutierrez-Gonzalez
A
, Cervantes-Miranda
DE
, Hernández-Aranda
KL
, Ochoa-Arvizo
M
, . Risk factors associated with urethral stricture recurrence after end-to-end urethroplasty and buccal mucosal graft urethroplasty
. Urologia
. 2021 Apr 8
:3915603211008739
.26.
Shalkamy
O
, Abdelazim
H
, Elshazly
A
, Soliman
A
, Agha
M
, Tagreda
I
, . Factors predicting urethral stricture recurrence after dorsal onlay augmented, buccal mucosal graft urethroplasty
. Urol Int
. 2021
;105
(3–4
):269
–77
.© 2022 S. Karger AG, Basel
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
2022
You do not currently have access to this content.
