Dubey Deepak, Vijjan Vivek, Kapoor Rakesh, Srivastava Aneesh, Mandhani Anil, Kumar Anant, Ansari M S
Department of Urology, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, India.
J Urol. 2007 Dec;178(6):2466-9. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.08.010. Epub 2007 Oct 15.
Reconstructive techniques for anterior urethral strictures have not been subjected to a randomized comparison. In a randomized controlled study we compared outcomes of buccal mucosa dorsal onlay vs skin flap dorsal onlay urethroplasty in patients with complex anterior urethral strictures.
In this prospective study 55 patients with anterior urethral strictures were randomized to undergo buccal mucosa dorsal onlay (27) or penile skin flap (28) urethroplasty. Operative time, hospital stay, short and long-term complications, recurrence rates, and patient satisfaction were compared between the 2 groups.
The number of patients with pendulous, bulbar and bulbopendulous strictures as well as mean stricture length and median followup were comparable between the 2 groups. Mean operative time was significantly higher in the penile flap (224 minutes) vs the buccal mucosa group (162 minutes, p = 0.001). In the penile flap group 6 patients had superficial penile skin necrosis, 1 had extensive skin loss and required skin grafting, and 2 had penile torsion. In the buccal mucosa group 25.6% of patients had minor morbidity which settled by 4 weeks after surgery. There were 9 (34.1%) patients in the penile flap group and 4 (14.8%) in the buccal mucosa group (p = 0.001) who had troublesome post-void dribbling. In the buccal mucosa group 89% and in the penile flap group 65% said they would recommend this procedure to another patient (p = 0.001). The success rate in the buccal mucosa (89.9%) and penile flap (85.6%) groups was similar (p >0.05).
On intermediate followup dorsal onlay penile skin flap and buccal mucosa urethroplasty provide similar success rates. Compared to buccal mucosa, penile flap procedures are technically complex, associated with higher morbidity and less preferred by patients.
前尿道狭窄的重建技术尚未进行随机对照比较。在一项随机对照研究中,我们比较了复杂前尿道狭窄患者颊黏膜背侧覆盖术与皮瓣背侧覆盖尿道成形术的疗效。
在这项前瞻性研究中,55例前尿道狭窄患者被随机分为两组,分别接受颊黏膜背侧覆盖术(27例)或阴茎皮瓣尿道成形术(28例)。比较两组的手术时间、住院时间、短期和长期并发症、复发率及患者满意度。
两组中阴茎体部、球部及球阴茎体部狭窄患者数量、平均狭窄长度及中位随访时间相当。阴茎皮瓣组平均手术时间(224分钟)显著长于颊黏膜组(162分钟,p = 0.001)。阴茎皮瓣组有6例患者发生浅表阴茎皮肤坏死,1例出现大面积皮肤缺损需植皮,2例发生阴茎扭转。颊黏膜组25.6%的患者有轻微并发症,术后4周内缓解。阴茎皮瓣组有9例(3