INTRODUCTION: Urethral duplication is a rare anomaly that can occur in various forms. Urethral duplication must be diagnosed and adequately treated. Only if clinical complaints develop should surgical management be considered. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The aim of this study was to retrospectively analyze patients with congenital urethral duplication: age at the time of diagnosis, type of urethral duplication, diagnostic and therapeutic measures as well as clinical aftercare were evaluated. RESULTS: This homogeneous and selected cohort included nine male children. The average follow-up was 6.2 years. Seven children were symptomatic (77.7%). We found a double urethra with epispadias in four boys and with hypospadias in three boys and urethral duplication with perineal/anal meatus in one patient and normotopia in another patient. In two children without symptoms, the urethral duplication was an incidental finding during diagnostic work-up for other anomalies. Seven children had additional urological anomalies: one fusiform megalourethra, three urethral valves with hypospadias, and two epispadias. Two children without symptoms were managed conservatively. An open operation joining the urethras was performed in three children, and four boys underwent endoscopic treatment of the urethral duplication. Long-term results revealed normal continence in all of the children. One child exhibited recurrent urinary tract infections and late stricture, which was opened endoscopically in a second session. CONCLUSION: A surgical approach is only indicated in the presence of clinical complaints. There is no surgical gold standard. The decision is ultimately reached on an individual basis depending on the findings and anatomy in view of the rarity and variability of the clinical picture. The functional result is of foremost importance for the urethra that requires reconstruction, but the cosmetic aspect should be respected to the same extent. We present the results of our experience in treating children with this urological condition. At the same time larger (multicenter) studies are needed, which will make it possible to formulate guidelines for this rare anomaly.
INTRODUCTION: Urethral duplication is a rare anomaly that can occur in various forms. Urethral duplication must be diagnosed and adequately treated. Only if clinical complaints develop should surgical management be considered. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The aim of this study was to retrospectively analyze patients with congenital urethral duplication: age at the time of diagnosis, type of urethral duplication, diagnostic and therapeutic measures as well as clinical aftercare were evaluated. RESULTS: This homogeneous and selected cohort included nine male children. The average follow-up was 6.2 years. Seven children were symptomatic (77.7%). We found a double urethra with epispadias in four boys and with hypospadias in three boys and urethral duplication with perineal/anal meatus in one patient and normotopia in another patient. In two children without symptoms, the urethral duplication was an incidental finding during diagnostic work-up for other anomalies. Seven children had additional urological anomalies: one fusiform megalourethra, three urethral valves with hypospadias, and two epispadias. Two children without symptoms were managed conservatively. An open operation joining the urethras was performed in three children, and four boys underwent endoscopic treatment of the urethral duplication. Long-term results revealed normal continence in all of the children. One child exhibited recurrent urinary tract infections and late stricture, which was opened endoscopically in a second session. CONCLUSION: A surgical approach is only indicated in the presence of clinical complaints. There is no surgical gold standard. The decision is ultimately reached on an individual basis depending on the findings and anatomy in view of the rarity and variability of the clinical picture. The functional result is of foremost importance for the urethra that requires reconstruction, but the cosmetic aspect should be respected to the same extent. We present the results of our experience in treating children with this urological condition. At the same time larger (multicenter) studies are needed, which will make it possible to formulate guidelines for this rare anomaly.