International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2008
Does a previous end-to-end urethroplasty alter the results of redo end-to-end urethroplasty in patients with traumatic posterior urethral strictures?
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gupta Narmada P, Mishra Saurabh, Dogra Prem N, Hemal Ashok K, Seth Amlesh, Kumar Rajeev
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the success rate of redo anastomotic urethroplasty and to compare it with primary anastomotic urethroplasty.
METHODS: We compared 52 patients with post-traumatic posterior urethral strictures (group 1, mean age 24.6 years, range 10-62) who had undergone redo urethroplasty with 66 patients (group 2, mean age 22.6, range 6-71) who had undergone primary anastomotic urethroplasty. Mean stricture length was 2.0 cm (1-4.5) and 2.5 cm (1.5-6), respectively. All of the patients in group 1 had a stricture located at the bulboprostatic anastomotic site. In group 2, 43 (65.2%) had a bulbomembranous stricture and 23 (34.8%) had a prostatomembranous stricture.
RESULTS: Mean operative time was 140 (100-240) and 90 min (75-200) in group 1 and 2, respectively. Mean blood loss was 180 (80-900) and 125 mL (50-700), respectively. Mean hospital stay was comparable (6.6 days vs 5.5 days) between the two groups. Mean follow up was 54 months (10-144) for group 1 and 62 months (12-122) for group 2. Corporal separation, inferior pubectomy, a transpubic approach and urethral rerouting were required in 22 (42.3%) and 12 (18.2%), 7 (13.5%) and 3 (4.5%), 12 (23%) and 5 (7.6%), 2 (3.8%) and nil patients in group 1 and 2, respectively. An excellent or acceptable outcome was achieved in 42 (80.8%) and 57 (86.4%), 8 (15.4%) and 7 (10.6%) patients, respectively. Two patients in each group failed.
CONCLUSIONS: Previously failed end-to-end urethroplasty does not alter the success rate of redo end-to-end urethroplasty.
METHODS: We compared 52 patients with post-traumatic posterior urethral strictures (group 1, mean age 24.6 years, range 10-62) who had undergone redo urethroplasty with 66 patients (group 2, mean age 22.6, range 6-71) who had undergone primary anastomotic urethroplasty. Mean stricture length was 2.0 cm (1-4.5) and 2.5 cm (1.5-6), respectively. All of the patients in group 1 had a stricture located at the bulboprostatic anastomotic site. In group 2, 43 (65.2%) had a bulbomembranous stricture and 23 (34.8%) had a prostatomembranous stricture.
RESULTS: Mean operative time was 140 (100-240) and 90 min (75-200) in group 1 and 2, respectively. Mean blood loss was 180 (80-900) and 125 mL (50-700), respectively. Mean hospital stay was comparable (6.6 days vs 5.5 days) between the two groups. Mean follow up was 54 months (10-144) for group 1 and 62 months (12-122) for group 2. Corporal separation, inferior pubectomy, a transpubic approach and urethral rerouting were required in 22 (42.3%) and 12 (18.2%), 7 (13.5%) and 3 (4.5%), 12 (23%) and 5 (7.6%), 2 (3.8%) and nil patients in group 1 and 2, respectively. An excellent or acceptable outcome was achieved in 42 (80.8%) and 57 (86.4%), 8 (15.4%) and 7 (10.6%) patients, respectively. Two patients in each group failed.
CONCLUSIONS: Previously failed end-to-end urethroplasty does not alter the success rate of redo end-to-end urethroplasty.