Perineal midline vertical incision verses inverted-U incision in the urethroplasty: which is better?

OBJECTIVE

To compare postoperative outcomes between the perineal inverted-U and the vertical midline incision approaches of the urethroplasty and clarify them via gross anatomy.

PATIENTS AND

METHODS

A total of 461 male patients, from Jan. 2006 to Jun. 2014, who underwent the urethroplasty via perineal midline vertical or inverted-U incision approach were recruited retrospectively. By match pairing for etiology and stricture length, 410 patients from two groups (205 for each group) were selected. Anatomy experiments were also performed. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: the Chi-square, Student's t and binary logistic regression analyses were performed to compare the operative and postoperative data on the two groups.

RESULTS

With regard to patients with bulbar urethral stricture, the rate of surgical site infection (SSI) in perineal inverted-U group was 18.6% while 1.9% in the midline vertical group (p < 0.001). As for patients with posterior urethral stricture, the rate of SSI in the perineal inverted-U group was 16.4% while 3.1% in the midline vertical group (p = 0.001). Mean hospital stay between both groups were 15.8 ± 9.0 vs. 12.7 ± 3.8 days (p < 0.001). Anatomy experiments showed the number of damaged vessels and nerves involved in the inverted-U incision were approximately 1.6 to 2.0 folds more than the vertical midline, but the visual operation fields are similar between two approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

The perineal midline vertical incision is a safer approach with fewer SSI and shorter hospital stay than the perineal inverted-U incision for bulbar and posterior urethroplasty.