Department of Urology, E. Michałowski Urological Hospital, Katowice, Poland.
Int Urol Nephrol. 2012 Jun;44(3):717-24. doi: 10.1007/s11255-011-0094-8. Epub 2011 Nov 30.
We comparatively evaluated urethral stricture (US) treatment outcomes, efficacy and complications, using either holmium laser endourethrotomy (HLU) or optical internal urethrotomy (OIU) since studies such as this are scarce in literature.
During 2003-2008, 50 men aged 17-78 years were operated on for primary or refractory US, 32 (64%) and 18 (36%) patients, respectively. The average stricture length was 1.86 cm. Strictures were single or multiple, forty-one (82%) and nine (18%) patients, respectively, and were located in the anterior or posterior urethra in 27 (54%) and 32 (64%) patients, respectively. US were iatrogenic in 32 (64%) and idiopathic in 18 (36%). Patients were divided into two groups, grpA and grpB, each containing 25 patients who were treated using either HLU or OIU, respectively. An evaluation scale of 1-3 was adopted and took maximum flow rate (Q(max)), postvoid residual (PVR), and quality of life (QL) into consideration. A score of '1 was very good, '2 was good, and '3 was poor.
Treatment results were evaluated after 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Evaluation of grpA was as follows: five (20%), nine (36%), and seven (28%) patients scored a '1; thirteen (52%), nine (20%), and four (16%) patients scored a '2; and seven (28%), eleven (44%), and fourteen (56%) patients scored a '3. Evaluation of grpB: seven (28%), ten (40%), and five (20%) patients scored a '1; eleven (44%), seven (28%), and ten (40%) patients scored a '2; and seven (28%), eight (32%), and ten (40%) patients scored a '3.
Neither complication rate nor degree of efficacy between HLU and OIU for US revealed a significant difference. We found both laser and conventional urethrotomies to be safe and effective modes of treatment.
我们比较了钬激光尿道内切开术(HLU)和尿道内切开术(OIU)治疗尿道狭窄(US)的效果、疗效和并发症,因为此类研究在文献中很少。
2003 年至 2008 年,50 名年龄在 17 至 78 岁的男性接受了原发性或难治性 US 的手术治疗,分别为 32(64%)和 18(36%)例患者。平均狭窄长度为 1.86cm。狭窄为单发或多发,分别为 41(82%)和 9(18%)例患者,分别位于前尿道或后尿道,分别为 27(54%)和 32(64%)例患者。US 为医源性 32(64%)和特发性 18(36%)。患者分为两组,grpA 和 grpB,每组各有 25 例患者,分别采用 HLU 或 OIU 治疗。采用 1-3 分的评估量表,考虑最大流量(Q(max))、剩余尿量(PVR)和生活质量(QL)。评分“1”表示非常好,“2”表示良好,“3”表示较差。
分别在术后 3、6 和 12 个月评估治疗结果。对 grpA 的评估结果如下:5(20%)、9(36%)和 7(28%)例患者评分为“1”;13(52%)、9(20%)和 4(16%)例患者评分为“2”;7(28%)、11(44%)和 14(56%)例患者评分为“3”。对 grpB 的评估结果如下:7(28%)、10(40%)和 5(20%)例患者评分为“1”;11(44%)、7(28%)和 10(40%)例患者评分为“2”;7(28%)、8(32%)和 10(40%)例患者评分为“3”。
钬激光尿道内切开术和尿道内切开术治疗尿道狭窄的并发症发生率和疗效无显著差异。我们发现激光和传统尿道切开术都是安全有效的治疗方法。