Background: We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients with traumatic posterior urethral injuries, analyzed postoperative findings to compare the results of the primary mode of management, and evaluated whether the Colapinto and McCallum classification system was valuable for predicting the complications. Methods: 55 patients with traumatic posterior urethral injuries were included in the study. A total of 35 patients underwent immediate realignment over a Foley catheter including direct Foley catheter insertion (group 1) and 20 underwent initial suprapubic tube placement followed by delayed urethroplasty (group 2). Urethral injuries were interpreted using the Colapinto and McCallum classification based on the retrograde urethrographies. Results: 44 (80.0%) of the patients were classified to type III in both groups (group 1, 29 [82.9%]; group 2, 15 [75.0%]). Of group 1, mild, moderate and severe urethral strictures developed in 7 (20.0%), 8 (22.9%) and 6 (17.1%), respectively, and developed in 6 (30.0%), 2 (10.0%) and 5 (25.0%), respectively, of group 2. Six (17.1%) and 2 (20.0%) had decreased potency and 4 (11.5%) and 1 (5.0%) were impotent in group 1 and 2, respectively. Of group 1, incontinence developed in 3 patients but 1 did not need treatment, and developed in 2 (10.0%) but 1 (5.0%) did not need treatment of group 2. The score test for trend demonstrated that there were no significant differences of these results. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that complications in patients with posterior urethral injuries are not related to the primary mode of management. Because most injuries are type III, the evolution toward the classification system is needed.

Keywords:
Urethra, Trauma, Wounds and injuries
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel
2002
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.
You do not currently have access to this content.