Is perineal urethrostomy a last resort or a viable alternative? Comparative analysis with buccal mucosal graft urethroplasty.

PURPOSE

We have aimed to compare perineal urethrostomy (PU) with buccal mucosal graft urethroplasty (BMGU) performed for the management of complex anterior urethral strictures (CAUS) regarding long-term sexual and functional outcomes of the patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 109 patients who underwent PU (n = 45) or BMGU (n = 64) between January 2018 and January 2024 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with posterior urethral strictures, those who underwent staged or different type of urethroplasty, cases that were lost to follow-up, cases followed up for less than 1 year or refused to participate were not included in the study. Turkish validated Urethral Stricture Surgery Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (USS-PROM), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) and quality of life (EQ-5D and EQ-VAS) questionnaires were applied to the patients to evaluate their functional and erectile functions.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent PU were significantly older than those who underwent BMGU [median 64 (45-76) vs. 57 (44-69), respectively, p < 0.001]. Follow-up times of the two groups were similar [PU: median 39 (14-72) vs. BMGU: 42.5 (13-71), p = 0.537]. In the PU and BMGU groups, 86.7% and 89.1% of patients were very satisfied or satisfied with the operation, respectively. The median EQ-VAS score in the PU group was 85 (55-95) points. Maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) values and postvoid residual urine volume (PVR) measurements were also comparable between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Permanent PU can be recommended for comorbid patients as a first-line treatment with resultant high success and patient satisfaction rates.