Loading…

Urethral Ultrasound as a Screening Tool for Stricture Recurrence After Oral Mucosa Graft Urethroplasty

Objective To evaluate the efficacy of sonourethrography (SUG) in combination with voiding pattern analysis to determine success after oral mucosa graft (OMG) urethroplasty. OMG urethroplasty is a standard treatment for men with recurrent urethral stricture. Because of its performance, the optimum fo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.) N.J.), 2011-09, Vol.78 (3), p.696-700
Main Authors: Seibold, Joerg, Werther, Maren, Alloussi, Saladin, Todenhöfer, Tilman, Gakis, Georgios, Aufderklamm, Stefan, Schilling, David, Stenzl, Arnulf, Schwentner, Christian
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective To evaluate the efficacy of sonourethrography (SUG) in combination with voiding pattern analysis to determine success after oral mucosa graft (OMG) urethroplasty. OMG urethroplasty is a standard treatment for men with recurrent urethral stricture. Because of its performance, the optimum follow-up algorithm remains controversial. Material and Methods Forty-nine patients (mean age 51 years) who underwent OMG urethroplasty were retrospectively identified. All men were subjected to a validated voiding questionnaire (International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS]), SUG, uroflowmetry, and residual urine measurement. The predictive value was analyzed with regard to stricture recurrence or patency as well as to urethral diameter. Retrograde urethrography was done to confirm the diagnosis. Results Strictures were bulbar in 39, penile in 4, and combined in 6 patients. Mean stricture length was 3.8 cm (range 1-10). Mean follow-up after surgery was 35 (range 15-70) months. SUG showed a mean diameter of 7.6 mm for bulbar grafts and 4.6 mm for penile grafts. Stricture recurrence was seen in 4 (8%) patients, yielding a significantly lower urethral width of 2.3 mm ( P
ISSN:0090-4295
1527-9995
DOI:10.1016/j.urology.2011.04.051