SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.50 número3Single-centre comparison of a novel single-step balloon inflation device and Amplatz sheath dilatation during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A pilot studyBeware the left-sided gallbladder índice de autoresíndice de assuntospesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Serviços Personalizados

Artigo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • Em processo de indexaçãoCitado por Google
  • Em processo de indexaçãoSimilares em Google

Compartilhar


South African Journal of Surgery

versão On-line ISSN 2078-5151
versão impressa ISSN 0038-2361

S. Afr. j. surg. vol.50 no.3 Cape Town Ago. 2012

 

UROLOGY

 

Treatment of male urethral strictures - possible reasons for the use of repeated dilatation or internal urethrotomy rather than urethroplasty

 

 

C F HeynsI; J van der MerweII; J BassonIII; A van der MerweIV

IMB ChB, MMed (Urol), PhD, FCSSA (Urol); Department of Urology, Stellenbosch University and Tygerberg Hospital, Western Cape
IIMB ChB, FCUrol (SA); Department of Urology, Stellenbosch University and Tygerberg Hospital, Western Cape
IIIMB ChB; Department of Urology, Stellenbosch University and Tygerberg Hospital, Western Cape
IVMB ChB, MRCS, FCUrol (SA), MMed (Urol); Department of Urology, Stellenbosch University and Tygerberg Hospital, Western Cape

 

 


ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the possible reasons for repeated urethral dilatation or optical internal urethrotomy rather than urethroplasty in the treatment of male urethral strictures.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Men referred to the stricture clinic of our institution during the period April 2007 - March 2008 were reviewed and the operative urological procedures performed in the same period were analysed. Statistical analysis was performed using Student's t-test and Fisher's exact test (p<0.05 statistically significant).
RESULTS: The mean age of the 125 men was 49.9 years (range 12.8 - 93.4 years). Previous stricture treatment had been given 1 - 2, 3 - 4 and 5 - 6 times in 52%, 32% and 12% of patients, respectively (4% had not undergone treatment). In these groups, previous treatment was dilatation in 70%, 76% and 72%, urethrotomy in 26%, 15% and 28%, and urethroplasty in 4%, 9% and 0, respectively. The group with 5 - 6 compared with 1 - 2 previous treatments was significantly older (mean age 60.2 v. 46.6 years) and had a significantly greater proportion with underlying co-morbidities (80% v. 52%). The group that had undergone urethroplasty compared with 5 - 6 repeated dilatations or urethrotomies was significantly younger (mean age 48.2 v. 60.2 years) with a lower prevalence of co-morbidities (47% v. 80%). During the study period urethroplasty was performed in 16 (2%) of 821 inpatients, whereas 55 men were seen who had undergone >3 previous procedures, indicating that urethroplasty was performed in less than one-third of cases in which it would have been the optimal treatment. Owing to limited theatre time, procedures indicated for malignancy, urolithiasis, renal failure and congenital anomalies were performed more often than urethroplasty.
CONCLUSIONS: Factors that possibly influenced the decision to perform repeated urethrotomy or dilatation instead of urethroplasty were limited theatre time, increased patient age and the presence of underlying co-morbidities.


 

“Full text available only in PDF format”

 

REFERENCES

1. Greenwell TJ, Castle C, Andrich DE, et al. Repeat urethrotomy and dilation for the treatment of urethral stricture are neither clinically effective not cost-effective. J Urol 2004;172(1):275-277.         [ Links ]

2. Wong SS, Narahari R, O'Riordan A, et al. Simple urethral dilatation, endoscopic urethrotomy, and urethroplasty for urethral stricture disease in adult men. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;(4):CD006934.         [ Links ]

3. Bullock TL, Brandes SB. Adult anterior urethral strictures: a national practice patterns survey of board certified urologists in the United States. J Urol 2007;177(2):685-690.         [ Links ]

4. Rapp DE, Chanduri K, Infusino G, et al. Internet survey of management trends of urethral strictures. Urol Int 2008;80(3):287-290.         [ Links ]

5. Anger JT, Buckley JC, Santucci RA, Elliott SP, Saigal CS and the Urologic Diseases in America Project. Trends in stricture management among male Medicare beneficiaries: underuse of urethroplasty? Urology 2011;77:481-486.         [ Links ]

6. Holm-Nielsen A, Schultz A, M0ller-Pedersen V. Direct vision internal urethrotomy. A critical review of 365 operations. Br J Urol 1984;56(3):308-312.         [ Links ]

7. Albers P, Fichtner J, Bruhl P, Muller SC. Long-term results of internal urethrotomy. J Urol 1996;156(5):1611-1614.         [ Links ]

8. Stone AR, Randall JR, Shorrock K, et al. Optical urethrotomy - a 3-year experience. Br J Urol 1983;55(6):701-704.         [ Links ]

9. Pansadoro V, Emiliozzi P. Internal urethrotomy in the management of anterior urethral strictures: long-term followup. J Urol 1996;156(1):73-75.         [ Links ]

10. Heyns CF, Steenkamp JW, De Kock ML, Whitaker P. Treatment of male urethral strictures: is repeated dilation or internal urethrotomy useful? J Urol 1998;160(2):356-358.         [ Links ]

11. Rourke KF, Jordan GH. Primary urethral reconstruction: the cost minimized approach to the bulbous urethral stricture. J Urol 2005;173(4):1206-1210.         [ Links ]

12. Wright JL, Wessells H, Nathens AB, Hollingworth W. What is the most cost-effective treatment for 1 to 2-cm bulbar urethral strictures: societal approach using decision analysis. Urology 2006;67(5):889-893.         [ Links ]

13. Santucci R, Eisenberg L. Urethrotomy has a much lower success rate than previously reported. J Urol 2010;183:1859-1862.         [ Links ]

14. Heyns CF, Naude AM, Pretorius MA. Surgical experience obtained by urology registrars: changes in the volume and spectrum of operative procedures: 19752002. African Journal of Urology 2005;11(2):82-88.         [ Links ]

15. Naude AM, Heyns CF. What is the place of internal urethrotomy in the treatment of urethral stricture disease? Nature Clin Pract Urol 2005;2(11):538-545.         [ Links ]

Creative Commons License Todo o conteúdo deste periódico, exceto onde está identificado, está licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons