Comparative analysis of patients with spongy urethral strictures undergoing multistage urethroplasty or permanent urethrostomy


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

Introduction. Deciding on the optimal surgical method for treating complex spongy urethral strictures is a challenging clinical task. Purpose of the study. To determine the clinical differences between patients undergoing multistage urethroplasty and permanent urethrostomy. Materials and methods. Two groups of patients were formed for the analysis: group I - 73 patients who underwent multistage urethroplasty; group II - 48 patients underwent permanent urethrostomy. The differences between groups were studied according to the following clinical parameters: age, body mass index, duration of the disease, previous treatment, etiology, length and localization of strictures, complications of stricture disease, concomitant diseases, urine flow parameters, the presence of early postoperative complications, and recurrence of strictures. Results. Patients of group I compared to group II are significantly younger (43.0 vs 59.6 years; p<0.0001). They have fewer idiopathic strictures (8.2 vs 31.3%; p=0.001), undergo cystostomy less often (26.0 vs 54.2%; p=0.002), have less pronounced lower urinary tract symptoms (I-PSS - 18.6 vs 23.8 points; p<0.0001, QoL - 4.3 vs 5, 1 point; p<0.0001) and impaired urination parameters (Qmax - 8.1 vs 6.5 ml/s; p=0.09, Qave - 5.5 vs 4.1 ml/s; p=0.015, PVR - 62.4 vs 126.0 ml; p=0.03). The incidence of concomitant diseases (69.9 vs 87.5%; p<0.025) and their number (1.8 vs 3.1; p<0.002) are significantly higher in group II. Among the comorbidities, cardiovascular diseases (31.5 vs 58.3%; p=0.015), diabetes mellitus (5.5 vs 16.7%; p=0.045) and prostatic hyperplasia (8.2 vs 27.1%; p=0.005) predominate. Early surgical complications in group I were detected in 28,8% of patients, in group II - in 2.1% (p<0,0001) of cases. The primary treatment success among patients with permanent urethrostomy is higher than with multistage urethroplasty (85.4 vs 65,8%; p=0,017). Conclusions. It is advisable to perform multistage surgery of extended spongy urethral strictures in young and middle-aged men without serious comorbidities in cases of conscious choice and sufficient awareness. Urethrostomy should initially be discussed with the patient as the operation of choice, considering age, cardiovascular comorbidity, diabetes mellitus and prostatic hyperplasia.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

V. P Glukhov

Rostov State Medical University

Email: docc.gvp@yandex.ru
M.D., Cand.Sc. (Med), Assoc. Prof. (Docent), Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Urology and Human Reproductive Health (with the Pediatric Urology and Andrology Сourse)

M. I Kogan

Rostov State Medical University

Email: dept_kogan@mail.ru
Honored Scientist of Russian Federation, M.D., Dr.Sc.(Med), Full Prof., Head, Dept. of Urology and Human Reproductive Health (with the Pediatric Urology and Andrology Сourse)

A. V Ilyash

Rostov State Medical University

Email: annailyash@yandex.ru
M.D., Cand.Sc.(Med), Assistant, Dept. of Urology and Human Reproductive Health (with the Pediatric Urology and Andrology Course)

V. A Bugaenko

Rostov State Medical University

Email: v.bugaenko1995@gmail.com
M.D., Postgraduate student, Dept. of Urology and Human Reproductive Health (with the Pediatric Urology and Andrology Course)

References

  1. Котов С.В. Стриктуры уретры у мужчин - современное состояние проблемы. Медицинский вестник Башкортостана. 2015;10(3):266-270
  2. Kulkarni S.B., Joglekar O.V., Alkandari M., Joshi P.M. Algorithm for the management of anterior urethral strictures. Turk J. Urol. 2018;44(3):195- 197. doi: 10.5152/tud.2018.76429.
  3. Fuehner C., Dahlem R., Fisch M., Vetterlein M.W. Update on managing anterior urethral strictures. Indian J. Urol. 2019; 35(2):94-100. doi: 10.4103/iju.IJU_52_19.
  4. Катибов М.И., Алибеков М.М., Магомедов З.М., Абдулхалимов А.М., Айдамиров В.Г. Одноэтапная буккальная двухлоскутная уретропластика по технике Kulkarni при протяжённых стриктурах передней уретры. Вестник урологии. 2020;8(4):44-52). doi: 10.21886/2308-6424-2020-8-4-44-52.
  5. Коган М.И., Глухов В.П., Миту сов В. В., Красулин В. В., Ильяш А.В. Сравнительный анализ однои двухэтапной аугментационной дорсальной inlay-пластики буккальным графтом протяженных стриктур спонгиозной уретры. Урология. 2018;(1):84-90). doi: 10.18565/urology.2018.1.84-90.
  6. Котов С.В. Результаты многогоэтапной (заместительной) уретропластики. Экспериментальная и клиническая урология. 2015;8(4):60-66
  7. Mori R.L., Angermeier K.W. Staged urethroplasty in the management of complex anterior urethral stricture disease. Transl Androl Urol. 2015;4(1):29-34. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2223-4683.2015.01.10.
  8. Hoy N.Y., Chapman D.W., Rourke K.F. Better defining the optimal management of penile urethral strictures: A retrospective comparison of single-stage vs. two-stage urethroplasty. Can Urol Assoc J. 2019;13(12):414- 418. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.5895.
  9. Selim M., Salem S., Elsherif E. et al. Outcome of staged buccal mucosal graft for repair of long segment anterior urethral stricture. BMC Urol. 2019;19(1):38. doi: 10.1186/s12894-019-0466-4.
  10. Benson C.R., Goldfarb R., Kirk P. et al. Population Analysis of Male Urethral Stricture Management and Urethroplasty Success in the United States. Urology. 2019;123:258-264. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2018.06.059.
  11. Andrich D.E., Greenwell T.J., Mundy A.R. The problems of penile urethroplasty with particular reference to 2-stage reconstructions. J. Urol. 2003;170(1):87- 89. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000069721.20193.fd.
  12. Bullock T.L., Brandes S.B. Adult anterior urethral strictures: a national practice patterns survey of board certified urologists in the United States. J. Urol. 2007;177(2):685-690. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.09.052.
  13. Lumen N., Beysens M., Van Praet C. et al. Perineal urethrostomy: surgical and functional evaluation of two techniques. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:365715. doi: 10.1155/2015/365715.
  14. Wessells H., Angermeier K.W., Elliott S. et al. Male Urethral Stricture: American Urological Association Guideline. J. Urol. 2017;197(1):182-190. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.07.087.
  15. Murphy G.P., Fergus K.B., Gaither T.W. et al. Urinary and Sexual Function after Perineal Urethrostomy for Urethral Stricture Disease: An Analysis from the TURNS. J. Urol. 2019;201(5):956-961. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000000027.
  16. Yura E., Hofer M.D., Yao H.H., Barbagli G., Che J. Perineal Urethrostomy: A Pearl in Failed Urethral Reconstruction. In: Martins FE, Kulkarni SB, Kohler TS (eds.). Textbook of Male Genitourethral Reconstruction. Springer Nature Switzerland AG; 2020:375-390. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21447-0_1.
  17. Fuchs J.S., Shakir N., McKibben M.J. et al. Changing Trends in Reconstruction of Complex Anterior Urethral Strictures: From Skin Flap to Perineal Urethrostomy. Urology. 2018;122:169-173. Doi: 10.1016/j. urology.2018.08.009.
  18. Verla W., Oosterlinck W., Waterloos M., Spinoit A.F., Lumen N. Perineal Urethrostomy for Complicated Anterior Urethral Strictures: Indications and Patient’s Choice. An Analysis at a Single Institution. Urology. 2020;138:160-165. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2019.11.064.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies