Objective: To describe the value of flexible cystoscopy versus conventional urethrography (retrograde urethrography and cystourethrography) in diagnosing pelvic fracture urethral distraction defects (PFUDDs). Patients and Methods: Between May 2010 and June 2011, 120 male patients with PFUDDs were evaluated. In this study, all patients underwent conventional urethrography after admission. Flexible cystoscopy was also used for comparison, followed by conventional urethrography. The flexible cystoscope was introduced into the posterior urethra and the area was evaluated for the length of the proximal urethra and any possible fistulas, false passages, calculi or displacement of the posterior urethra. Results: Severe allergic reaction or obvious discomfort did not occur in any patients after conventional urethrography or flexible cystoscopy. By comparing the data obtained from flexible cystoscopy to those from conventional urethrography, no statistical difference was found in the measured length of the proximal posterior urethra (4.31 ± 2.28 vs. 4.02 ± 3.12, p > 0.05). However, the rate of detection in other abnormalities was higher in flexible cystoscopy than in conventional urethrography (48.3 vs. 10.8%, p < 0.05). Seventeen (14.2%), 9 (7.5%) and 32 (26.7%) patients were detected with fistula, false passage and calculus, respectively, according to flexible cystoscopy. In comparison, fistula, false passage and calculus were only observed in 2 (1.7%), 7 (5.8%) and 4 (3.3%) patients, respectively, through conventional urethrography imaging. Conclusions: Flexible cystoscopy is a valuable procedure in the evaluation of the posterior urethra and bladder neck, and in patients with urethral distraction defects before surgery. More details about fistulas, false passages, calculi and urethral defects could be obtained through this method.

Keywords:
Image analysis, Diagnosis, Pelvic fracture urethral distraction defects, Flexible cystoscope
1.
Jordan GH, Schlossberg SM: Surgery of the penis and urethra; in Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan ED Jr, et al (eds): Campbell’s Urology, ed 8. Philadelphia, WB Saunders, 2002, pp 3886–3954.
2.
Osman Y, Abou Elghar M, Mansour O, et al: Magnetic resonance urethrography in comparison to retrograde urethrography in diagnosis of male urethral stricture: is it clinically relevant? Eur Urol 2006;50:587–594.
3.
McAninch JW, Laing FC, Jeffrey RB Jr: Sonourethrography in the evaluation of urethral strictures: a preliminary report. J Urol 1988;139:294–297.
4.
Gallentine ML, Morey AF: Imaging of the male urethra for stricture disease. Urol Clin North Am 2002;29:361–372.
5.
El-Kassaby AW, Osman T, Abdel-Aal A, Sadek M, Nayef N: Dynamic three-dimensional spiral computed tomographic cysto-urethrography: a novel technique for evaluating post-traumatic posterior urethral defects. BJU Int 2003;92:993–996.
6.
Chou CP, Huang JS, Wu MT, et al: CT voiding urethrography and virtual urethroscopy: preliminary study with 16-MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;184:1882–1888.
7.
Gallentine ML, Morey AF: Imaging of the male urethra for stricture disease. Urol Clin North Am 2002;29:361–372.
8.
Pavlica P, Barozzi L, Menchi I: Imaging of male urethra. Eur Radiol 2003;13:1583–1596.
9.
El-Ghar MA, Osman Y, Elbaz E, et al: MR urethrogram versus combined retrograde urethrogram and sonourethrography in diagnosis of urethral stricture. Eur J Radiol 2010;74:e193–e198.
10.
Koraitim MM, Reda IS: Role of magnetic resonance imaging in assessment of posterior urethral distraction defects. Urology 2007;70:403–406.
11.
Tsuchida S, Sugawara H: A new flexible fibercystoscope for visualization of the bladder neck. J Urol 1973;109:830–831.
12.
Witjes JA, Moonen PM, van der Heijden AG: Comparison of hexaminolevulinate based flexible and rigid fluorescence cystoscopy with rigid white light cystoscopy in bladder cancer: results of a prospective phase II study. Eur Urol 2005;47:319–322.
13.
Kawakami M, Ishikawa M, Kontani K, et al: Flexible video cystoscope with built-in high-frequency cauterizing element for transurethral resection of bladder tumor. Int J Urol 2001;8:713–714.
14.
Lewis RM, McCullough DL: Use of the flexible fiberoptic nephroscope in the preoperative evaluation and delayed repair of traumatic urethral strictures. J Urol 1985;133:1036–1037.
15.
Kielb SJ, Voeltz ZL, Wolf JS: Evaluation and management of traumatic posterior urethral disruption with flexible cystourethroscopy. J Trauma 2001;50:36–40.
16.
Cohen JK, Berg G, Carl GH, et al: Primary endoscopic realignment following posterior urethral disruption. J Urol 1991;146:1548–1550.
17.
Husmann DA, Rathbun SR: Long-term follow up of visual internal urethrotomy for management of short (less than 1 cm) penile urethral strictures following hypospadias repair. J Urol 2006;176:1738–1741.
18.
Clayman RV, Reddy P, Lange PH: Flexible fiberoptic and rigid-rod lens endoscopy of the lower urinary tract: a prospective controlled comparison. J Urol 1984;131:715–716.
19.
Flannigan GM, Gelister JS, Noble JG, et al: Rigid versus flexible cystoscopy: a controlled trial of patient tolerance. Br J Urol 1988;62:537–540.
20.
Figueroa JC, Hoenig DM: Use of 7.5F flexible pediatric cystoscope in the staging and management of urethral stricture disease. J Endourol 2004;18:119–121.
21.
Morgenthal CB, Richards WO, Dunkin BJ, Forde KA, Vitale G, Lin E: The role of the surgeon in the evolution of flexible endoscopy. Surg Endosc 2007;21:838–853.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
2012
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.