Urethral Extensibility Applied to Urethral Advancement

Bahir Sabah Allawi; Alaa H. Al-Farhan; Rafid F. Al-Hussaini

doi:10.3889/oamjms.2020.4810

Authors

Bahir Sabah Allawi Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, College of Medicine, University of Babylon, Hillah, Iraq
Alaa H Al-Farhan Department of Surgery, Basrah Medical College, Basrah, Iraq
Rafid F. Al-Hussaini Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, College of Medicine, University of Babylon, Hillah, Iraq

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2020.4810

Keywords:

Gap-To-Urethra ratio, Meatal retraction, Meatal stenosis, Urethral advancement, Urethral extensibility, Urethral mobilization

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The male urethra in humans has a large capacity to extend under traction. This property is the main principle of the urethral advancement technique.

AIM: We aimed to determine the safe limits of urethral mobilization and extensibility for reconstructive surgery of distal to midshaft hypospadias by applying urethral extensibility on the urethral advancement technique. Also, we wanted to evaluate the variable application of the gap-to-urethra (G:U) ratio from a cadaver to a live human body.

METHODS: From November 2004 to February 2006, 20 boys aged from 2 to 16 years old underwent repair of midshaft to glanular hypospadias by urethral advancement technique. The ratio of G:U proposed for a safe limit of urethral extensibility (measured from normal, fresh human cadaveric urethras) applied to know if its application can help in decreasing the rate of late complications. The mean follow-up period was 10 months, which ranged from 4 to 16 months.

RESULTS: Late complications were as follows: 25% meatal retraction (MR), 15% meatal stenosis (MS), and 5% fistula. Besides, MR and MS late complications associated with urethral mobilization of G:U ratio of less than 73%.

CONCLUSION: The more the approximation in the application of the G:U ratio, the less the rate of MS and MR. Besides, urethral mobilization to the base of the penis helps to decrease the frequency of MS and MR. Furthermore, the type of complication, MR or MS, in urethral advancement correlates with the extent of urethral mobilization.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block

References

Baskin LS, Ebbers MB. Hypospadias: Anatomy, etiology, and technique. J Pediatr Surg. 2006;41(3):463-72. PMid:16516617

Alkan M, Oguzkurt P, Ezer SS, Ince E, Hicsonmez A. Evaluation of the results of eccentric circummeatal-based flap with combined limited urethral mobilization technique for distal hypospadias repair. J Pediatr Urol. 2008;4(3):206-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2007.11.008

Mouriquand PD, Mure PY. Hypospadias. In: John G, Richard R, Pierre M, editors. Pediatric Urology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2009. p. 713-27.

Ratan SK, Ratan J, Rattan KN. Is tubularization of the mobilized urethral plate a better alternative to tubularization of an incised urethral plate for hypospadias repair? Pediatr Surg Int. 2009;25(2):185-90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-008-2312-8 PMid:19096854

Sensöz O, Ortak T, Baran CN, Unlü RE. A new technique for distal hypospadias repair: Advancement of a distally deepithelialized urethrocutaneous flap. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003;112(3):840-3. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000070179.92405.c9 PMid:12960867

Elsayed ER, Khalil S, Abd Samad K, Abdalla MM. Evaluation of distally folded onlay flap in repair of distal penile hypospadias. J Pediatr Urol. 2012;8(1):103-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2010.09.008 PMid:20889383

Mathieu P. Traitement en un temps de l’hypospade balanique et juxta-balanique. J Chir. 1932;39:481-7.

Hammouda HM, El-Ghoneimi A, Bagli D, McLorie G, Khoury AE. Tubularized incised plate repair: Functional outcome after intermediate followup. J Urol. 2003;169(1):331-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(05)64120-1 PMid:12478185

Murphy JP. Hypospadias. In: Ashcraft KW, Murphy JP, Sharp RJ, Sigalet DL, Snyder CL, editors. Pediatric Surgery. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2000. p. 763-79.

Belman AB. Hypospadias and chordee. In: Belman AB, King LR, Kramer SA, editors. Clinical Pediatric Urology. 4th ed. London: Martin Dunitz; 2002. p. 1061-88.

Roodsari SS, Mulaeian M, Hiradfar M. Urethral advancement and glanuloplasty with V flap of the glans in the repair of anterior hypospadias. Asian J Surg. 2006;29(3):180-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1015-9584(09)60083-x PMid:16877221

Chang JA, Lue TF. Surgical anatomy of the penis and erectile bodies1. Atlas Urol Clin North Am. 2002;10(2):119-25.

Da Silva EA, Sampaio FJ. Urethral extensibility applied to reconstructive surgery. J Urol. 2002;167(5):2042-5. PMid:11956434