| Literature DB >> 26413341 |
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome of a modified onlay island flap (MOIF) with that of the Mathieu urethroplasty for distal hypospadias repair. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a prospective randomised study, 60 patients with coronal, subcoronal and distal penile hypospadias, with a urethral plate width of ⩽6 mm, and minimal or no chordee, underwent either MOIF using a midline longitudinal outer preputial skin flap passed ventrally by penile buttonholing through dartos fascia incision, or a Mathieu urethroplasty. Closed envelopes were used for randomly selecting patients for each procedure. The operative duration, complications, cosmetic outcome, urinary stream and relatives' satisfaction were reported for each procedure.Entities:
Keywords: CS, coronal sulcus; HOSE, hypospadias objective scoring evaluation; Hypospadias; MOIF, modified onlay island flap; Mathieu; Modified onlay island flap; PCA, penile cosmetic appearance; PS, penile shaft; TIP, tubularised incised plate; UM, urethral meatus; UP, urethral plate; Urethroplasty
Year: 2015 PMID: 26413341 PMCID: PMC4563012 DOI: 10.1016/j.aju.2015.06.005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arab J Urol ISSN: 2090-598X
Fig. 1Operative steps of the MOIF urethroplasty; (A) skin incisions delineating the flap. (B) Excision of skin lateral to the flap. (C) Excision of the preputial mucosa with preservation of the dartos fascia. (D) Longitudinal incision of the dartos fascia. (E) Meatoplasty by excising excess preputial skin flush with the glans penis.
Fig. 2Line drawings of the MOIF urethroplasty; operative steps. (A) Dorsal preputial skin incisions. (B) Excised skin lateral to the flap and dartos incision (dashed line). (C) Excision of the inner preputial layer and dorsal button-holing of the penis. (D) Suturing of the flap to the edges of the UP. (E) Dartos pedicles cover the suture lines. (F) Final appearance and the outer suture line.
The suggested postoperative cosmetic evaluation score.
| Variables | Grade | Diagrammatic representation | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||
| The external urethral meatus | ||||
| Regular vertical slit-like | 3 | |||
| Irregular vertical slit-like | 2 | |||
| Rounded or disfigured | 1 | |||
| The coronal sulcus | ||||
| Excellent | 3 | |||
| Satisfactory | 2 | |||
| Unsatisfactory | 1 | |||
| The penile shaft | ||||
| Excellent | 3 | |||
| Satisfactory | 2 | |||
| Unsatisfactory | 1 | |||
The sum of grades of all variables represents the PCA score, of 3–9.
Preoperative patient data, operative duration and postoperative data (complications, cosmetic appearance, shape of urinary stream and satisfaction of relatives).
| Mean (SD, range) or | MOIF | Mathieu | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (months) | 40.7 (17.3, 9–76) | 41.1 (18.9, 14–83) | 0.653 |
| Site of native UM | 0.786 | ||
| Coronal | 6 | 4 | |
| Subcoronal | 10 | 11 | |
| Distal penile | 14 | 15 | |
| Operative duration (min) | 156.5 (22.6, 111–213) | 152.8 (18.4, 122–195) | 0.710 |
| Complications | 0.036 | ||
| None | 30 | 24 | |
| Fistula | 0 | 4 | |
| Glanular dehiscence | 0 | 2 | |
| UM | <0.001 | ||
| Regular vertical slit-like | 4 | 0 | |
| Irregular vertical slit-like | 26 | 15 | |
| Rounded or disfigured | 0 | 15 | |
| CS | 0.001 | ||
| Excellent | 5 | 0 | |
| Satisfactory | 24 | 18 | |
| Unsatisfactory | 1 | 12 | |
| PS | <0.001 | ||
| Excellent | 28 | 0 | |
| Satisfactory | 2 | 22 | |
| Unsatisfactory | 0 | 8 | |
| PCA | <0.001 | ||
| Excellent | 9 | 0 | |
| Satisfactory | 21 | 18 | |
| Unsatisfactory | 0 | 12 | |
| Urinary stream | <0.001 | ||
| Forward | 5 | 2 | |
| Deflected | 24 | 13 | |
| Spraying | 1 | 15 | |
| Relatives’ satisfaction | <0.001 | ||
| Excellent | 21 | 1 | |
| Satisfactory | 9 | 14 | |
| Unsatisfactory | 0 | 15 | |
Fig. 3Cosmetic results of the MOIF urethroplasty show: (A) a vertical slit-like UM (score 3). (B) A disfigured UM, excellent CS and PS (score = 1 + 3 + 3 = 7; satisfactory PCA).