Literature DB >> 26241906

Buccal Versus Lingual Mucosa Graft in Anterior Urethroplasty: A Prospective Comparison of Surgical Outcome and Donor Site Morbidity.

N Lumen1, S Vierstraete-Verlinde1, W Oosterlinck1, P Hoebeke1, E Palminteri2, C Goes1, H Maes3, A-F Spinoit1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We prospectively compared buccal mucosa graft and lingual mucosa graft urethroplasty with respect to donor site morbidity and urethroplasty outcome.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients treated with buccal mucosa graft (29) or lingual mucosa graft (29) urethroplasty were included in the study. Oral pain and morbidity were assessed using the numeric rating scale (scale 0 to 10) as well as an in-home questionnaire administered 3 days, 2 weeks and 6 months postoperatively.
RESULTS: After a mean (± SD) followup of 30 (± 13) months successful urethroplasty was achieved in 24 (82.8%) and 26 (89.7%) patients treated with buccal mucosa graft and lingual mucosa graft, respectively (p = 0.306). Median numeric rating scale after 3 days, 2 weeks and 6 months was 4, 2 and 0 for buccal mucosa graft and 6, 3 and 0 for lingual mucosa graft, respectively, with no statistical differences between the groups. At day 3 significantly more patients in the lingual mucosa graft group had severe difficulties with eating and drinking (62.1% vs 24.1%, p = 0.004) and speaking (93.1% vs 55.2%, p = 0.001), and had dysgeusia (48.3% vs 13.8%, p = 0.01). Two weeks postoperatively speech impairment was still more frequent with lingual mucosa graft (55.2% vs 13.8%, p = 0.002), whereas oral tightness was more frequent with buccal mucosa graft (41.4% vs 6.9%, p = 0.005). After 6 months 44.8% and 31% of patients treated with buccal mucosa graft and lingual mucosa graft, respectively, still reported sensitivity disorders (p = 0.279).
CONCLUSIONS: The success of urethroplasty with lingual and buccal mucosa grafts was similar. Oral pain was not different after both grafts. In the early postoperative period there were differences in oral morbidity between buccal and lingual mucosa grafts. Long-term oral morbidity was not infrequent with both grafts.
Copyright © 2016 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  morbidity; mouth mucosa; urethral stricture

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26241906     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.07.098

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  16 in total

Review 1.  Refractory Urethral Stricture Management: Indications for Alternative Grafts and Flaps.

Authors:  Alison C Levy; Alex J Vanni
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  Histopathological changes in oral mucosa in cases of failed augmented urethroplasty.

Authors:  Rohit Bhattar; Sher S Yadav; Vinay Tomar
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2019-02-05

3.  Fertility and sexuality issues in congenital lifelong urology patients: male aspects.

Authors:  Anne-Françoise Spinoit; Mieke Waterschoot; Céline Sinatti; Tariq Abbas; Nina Callens; Martine Cools; Rizwan Hamid; Moneer K Hanna; Pankaj Joshi; Rosalia Misseri; Joao Luiz Pippi Salle; Joshua Roth; Lloyd J W Tack; Gunter De Win
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-02-17       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Oral quality of life after buccal mucosal graft harvest for substitution urethroplasty. More than a bite?

Authors:  E Morán; M A Bonillo; L Fernández-Estevan; E Martínez-Cuenca; S Arlandis; E Broseta; F Boronat
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-06-21       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 5.  Management of Long-Segment and Panurethral Stricture Disease.

Authors:  Francisco E Martins; Sanjay B Kulkarni; Pankaj Joshi; Jonathan Warner; Natalia Martins
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2015-12-08

Review 6.  Biofabrication and biomaterials for urinary tract reconstruction.

Authors:  Moustafa M Elsawy; Achala de Mel
Journal:  Res Rep Urol       Date:  2017-05-10

7.  Urethral reconstruction with autologous urine-derived stem cells seeded in three-dimensional porous small intestinal submucosa in a rabbit model.

Authors:  Yang Liu; Wenjun Ma; Bo Liu; Yangcai Wang; Jiaqiang Chu; Geng Xiong; Lianju Shen; Chunlan Long; Tao Lin; Dawei He; Denis Butnaru; Lyundup Alexey; Yuanyuan Zhang; Deying Zhang; Guanghui Wei
Journal:  Stem Cell Res Ther       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 6.832

Review 8.  Lingual mucosal graft urethroplasty 12 years later: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Alberto Abrate; Andrea Gregori; Alchiede Simonato
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2019-01-09

9.  Lingual mucosal graft two-stage Bracka technique for redo hypospadias repair.

Authors:  Ahmed Sakr; Ehab Elkady; Mohamed Abdalla; Amr Fawzi; Mostafa Kamel; Esam Desoky; Mohamed Seleem; Mohamed Omran; Ehab Elsayed; Salem Khalil
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2017-07-19

Review 10.  Onlay Repair Technique for the Management of Ureteral Strictures: A Comprehensive Review.

Authors:  Shengwei Xiong; Jie Wang; Weijie Zhu; Kunlin Yang; Guangpu Ding; Xuesong Li; Daniel D Eun
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-07-27       Impact factor: 3.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.