Gina M Cambareri1, Michael Yap1, George W Kaplan2. 1. Department of Urology, University of California San Diego (UCSD), San Diego, CA, USA. 2. Department of Urology, Rady Children's Specialists of San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term outcomes of hypospadias repair using an onlay preputial graft. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patient records from 1989 to 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. One surgeon performed all cases and surgical technique was the same for all patients. RESULTS: There were 62 patients in the cohort, with a mean (range) follow-up of 47.4 (1-185) months. The meatal location was separated into distal (one patient), midshaft (19) and proximal (42). In all, 22 (35.5%) patients had complications. There were three main types of complications, including meatal stenosis in three (4.8%), stricture in three (4.8%), and fistula in 21 (33.9%). The mean (range) timing of presentation with a complication after surgery was 24.9 (1-127) months. In all, 54.5% of the patients with complications presented at ≥1 year after the initial surgery and 31.8% presented at ≥3 years. On univariable analysis age at the time of surgery, length of the graft, presence of chordee or meatal location (proximal or midshaft) did not predict a complication. The width of the graft was associated with a complication, with each 1 mm increase in width decreasing the odds of a complication by 56%. On multivariable analysis width remained statistically significant (odds ratio 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.230-0.840; P = 0.013) for predicting a complication. CONCLUSION: Hypospadias repair with onlay preputial graft is an option for single-stage repair, especially in cases of proximal hypospadias or where the urethral plate width and/or the glanular groove is insufficient for other types of repair. Compared with flaps, the use of grafts may decrease the risk of penile torsion and prevent less bulk around the urethra, improving skin and glans closure.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term outcomes of hypospadias repair using an onlay preputial graft. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patient records from 1989 to 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. One surgeon performed all cases and surgical technique was the same for all patients. RESULTS: There were 62 patients in the cohort, with a mean (range) follow-up of 47.4 (1-185) months. The meatal location was separated into distal (one patient), midshaft (19) and proximal (42). In all, 22 (35.5%) patients had complications. There were three main types of complications, including meatal stenosis in three (4.8%), stricture in three (4.8%), and fistula in 21 (33.9%). The mean (range) timing of presentation with a complication after surgery was 24.9 (1-127) months. In all, 54.5% of the patients with complications presented at ≥1 year after the initial surgery and 31.8% presented at ≥3 years. On univariable analysis age at the time of surgery, length of the graft, presence of chordee or meatal location (proximal or midshaft) did not predict a complication. The width of the graft was associated with a complication, with each 1 mm increase in width decreasing the odds of a complication by 56%. On multivariable analysis width remained statistically significant (odds ratio 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.230-0.840; P = 0.013) for predicting a complication. CONCLUSION:Hypospadias repair with onlay preputial graft is an option for single-stage repair, especially in cases of proximal hypospadias or where the urethral plate width and/or the glanular groove is insufficient for other types of repair. Compared with flaps, the use of grafts may decrease the risk of penile torsion and prevent less bulk around the urethra, improving skin and glans closure.
Authors: Christopher J Long; David I Chu; Robert W Tenney; Andrew R Morris; Dana A Weiss; Aseem R Shukla; Arun K Srinivasan; Stephen A Zderic; Thomas F Kolon; Douglas A Canning Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-11-10 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: K J Bernabé; N J Nokoff; D Galan; D Felsen; C E Aston; P Austin; L Baskin; Y-M Chan; E Y Cheng; D A Diamond; R Ellens; A Fried; S Greenfield; T Kolon; B Kropp; Y Lakshmanan; S Meyer; T Meyer; A M Delozier; L L Mullins; B Palmer; A Paradis; P Reddy; K J Scott Reyes; M Schulte; J M Swartz; E Yerkes; C Wolfe-Christensen; A B Wisniewski; D P Poppas Journal: J Pediatr Urol Date: 2018-02-02 Impact factor: 1.921