International Center for Reconstructive Urethral Surgery, Arezzo, Italy.
Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute (URI), San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.
Int Braz J Urol. 2020 Jul-Aug;46(4):511-518. doi: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2020.99.04.
The surgical treatment of bulbar urethral strictures is still one of the most challenging reconstructive surgery problems. Bulbar urethral strictures are usually categorized as traumatic and non-traumatic strictures depending on the aetiology. The traumatic strictures are caused by trauma and they determine disruption of the urethra with obliteration of the urethral lumen, ending with fibrotic gaps between the urethral ends. Differently, the non-traumatic urethral strictures are mainly caused by catheterization, instrumentation, and infection, or they can also be idiopathic. They are usually asso-ciated with spongiofibrosis of the segment of the urethra that has been involved. Worldwide, two different surgical approaches are currently adopted for bulbar urethral repair: transecting techniques with end-to-end anastomosis and non-transecting techniques followed by grafting. Traumatic obliterated strictures require transection of the urethra allowing complete removal of the fibrotic tissue that involves the urethral ends. Conversely, non-traumatic, non-obliterated urethral strictures require augmentation of the urethral plate using oral mucosa grafts. Nowadays, it is still difficult to choose the correct surgical management for non-obliterated bulbar stricture repair. Indeed, different surgical techniques have been proposed (pedicled flap vs free graft, dorsal vs ventral placement of the graft, non-transecting technique using or non-using free graft, etc.) but none emerged as the best solution since all techniques have showed similar success and complication rates. Consequently, the final choice is still based on surgeon's preferences and patient's characteristics. Within the current manuscript, we like to present some of our tips and tricks that we developed along our prolonged surgical experience on the treatment of bulbar urethral strictures. These might be of interest for surgeons that approach this complex surgery. Moreover, our suggestions want to be useful regardless the type of chosen technique being adaptable for different scenario.
球部尿道狭窄的手术治疗仍然是最具挑战性的重建手术问题之一。球部尿道狭窄通常根据病因分为创伤性和非创伤性狭窄。创伤性狭窄是由创伤引起的,它们会导致尿道断裂,尿道腔闭塞,最终导致尿道末端之间出现纤维性间隙。不同的是,非创伤性尿道狭窄主要由导尿、器械操作和感染引起,也可能是特发性的。它们通常与受累尿道段的海绵体纤维化有关。在世界范围内,目前有两种不同的手术方法用于球部尿道修复:端端吻合的切开技术和随后进行移植的非切开技术。创伤性闭塞性狭窄需要切开尿道,以完全切除涉及尿道末端的纤维组织。相反,非创伤性、非闭塞性尿道狭窄需要使用口腔黏膜移植物增强尿道板。如今,对于非闭塞性球部狭窄修复,仍然很难选择正确的手术治疗方法。事实上,已经提出了不同的手术技术(带蒂皮瓣与游离移植物、背侧与腹侧放置移植物、使用或不使用游离移植物的非切开技术等),但由于所有技术的成功率和并发症发生率相似,没有一种技术成为最佳解决方案。因此,最终的选择仍然基于外科医生的偏好和患者的特点。在本文中,我们想介绍一些我们在长期的球部尿道狭窄治疗手术经验中发展起来的技巧。对于处理这种复杂手术的外科医生来说,这些可能会很感兴趣。此外,我们的建议旨在无论选择的技术类型如何都具有实用性,可以适应不同的情况。