Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and outcomes of PlasmaKinetic™ urethrotomy against cold knife direct vision internal urethrotomy in terms of recurrence rates. Patients and Methods: A total of 136 male patients with urethral strictures were enrolled into the study. The patients were allocated to cold knife or PlasmaKinetic urethrotomy groups sequentially by using computer-generated numbers. Group A (PlasmaKinetic) and group B (cold knife) included 70 and 66 patients, respectively. All patients were reevaluated at the 3rd, 9th and 18th month postoperatively with uroflowmetry. Results: Group A patients had a postoperative 3rd-month maximum flow rate value of 16.09 ml/s, whereas this same parameter was 15.15 ml/s in group B (p < 0.05). The urethral stricture recurrence rate up to the 9-month period was statistically significant for group A (14%) compared with group B (30%). When we compared the recurrence rates of these groups from postoperative day 1 up to the 18th month, the results were 37% for group A and 33% for group B (p > 0.05). Conclusion: PlasmaKinetic urethrotomy provides a better recurrence-free rate during the early period compared with conventional cold knife therapy. Nevertheless, the outcome of the stricture did not change and fibrotic tissue reformed between the 9th and the 18th month.

Keywords:
Urethral stricture, PlasmaKineticࡊ urethrotomy, Urethra
1.
Mundy AR, Andrich DE: Urethral strictures. BJU Int 2011;107:6-26.
2.
Sachse H: Zur Behandlung der Harnröhrenstriktur: die transurethrale Schlitzung unter Sicht mit scharfem Schnitt. Fortschr Med 1974;92:12-15.
3.
Lumen N, Oosterlinck W, Hoebeke P: Urethral reconstruction using buccal mucosa or penile skin grafts: systematic review and meta-analysis. Urol Int 2012;89:387-394.
4.
Seth A, Saini AK, Dogra PN: Hybrid minimally invasive urethroplasty for pan-anterior urethral strictures: initial results. Urol Int 2012;89:116-119.
5.
Bullock TL, Brandes SB: Adult anterior urethral strictures: a national practice patterns survey of board certified urologists in the United States. J Urol 2007;177:685-690.
6.
Giannakopoulos X, Grammeniatis E, Gratzios A, et al: Sachse urethrotomy versus endoscopic urethrotomy plus transurethral resection of the fibrous callus (Guillemin's technique) in the treatment of urethral stricture. Urology 1997;49:243-247.
7.
Dutkiewicz SA, Wrablewski M: Comparison of treatment results between holmium laser endourethrotomy and optical internal urethrotomy for urethral stricture. Int Urol Nephrol 2012;44:717-724.
8.
Atak M, Tokgoz H, Akduman B, Erol B, et al: Low power holmium:YAG laser urethrotomy for urethral stricture disease: comparison of outcomes with the cold-knife technique. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2011;27:503-507.
9.
Loh SA, Carlson GA, Chang EI, et al: Comparative healing of surgical incisions created by PEAK PlasmaBlade, conventional electrosurgery, and a scalpel. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009;124:1849-1859.
10.
Ruidiaz ME, Messmer D, Atmodjo DY, et al: Comparative healing of human cutaneous surgical incisions created by the PEAK PlasmaBlade, conventional electrosurgery, and a standard scalpel. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011;128:104-111.
11.
Rassweiler J, Schulze M, Stock C, et al: Bipolar transurethral resection of the prostate - technical modifications and early clinical experience. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 2007;16:11-21.
12.
Alschibaja M, May F, Treiber U, Paul R, et al: Recent improvements in transurethral high-frequency electrosurgery of the prostate. BJU Int 2006;97:243-246.
13.
Smith D, Khoubehi B, Patel A: Bipolar electrosurgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia: transurethral electro-vaporization and resection of the prostate. Curr Opin Urol 2005;15:95-100.
14.
Wendt-Nordahl G, Hacker A, Reich O, et al: The Vista system: a new bipolar device for endourological procedures: comparison with conventional resectoscope. Eur Urol 2004;46:586-590.
15.
Basok EK, Basaran A, Gurbuz C, et al: Can bipolar vaporization be considered an alternative energy source in the endoscopic treatment of urethral strictures and bladder neck contracture? Int Braz J Urol 2008;34:577-586.
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
2014
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.