OBJECTIVE: To report stricture characteristics, complications, and treatment outcomes among elderly men undergoing urethral reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of urethroplasty cases and outcomes by a single surgeon from 2007 to 2014 was performed. Men were stratified by decade of life at time of surgery (<50, 50-59, 60-69, ≥70 years). Individuals with a history of hypospadias were excluded. RESULTS: Among 514 urethroplasty procedures, 184 (36%) were evaluated in men ≥60 years. When stratified by decade of life, elderly men were more likely to have a history of radiation therapy (0% vs 5% vs 19% vs 50%; P <.0001) and experience treatment failure (6% vs 16% vs 20% vs 26%; P <.0001) during follow-up (median 63 months). The estimated 60-month stricture recurrence-free survival decreased with increasing age at time of urethroplasty (94% vs 89% vs 78% vs 74%; P <.0001). In patients ≥60 years, success rates of anastomotic, substitution, and urethrostomy techniques were 80%, 65%, and 88%; anastomotic urethroplasty success improved after excluding those patients with prior radiation. After surgery, elderly were more likely to have voiding dysfunction and <90-day Clavien ≥3 complications requiring endoscopic intervention. On multivariable analysis, advancing age per decade beyond 50 years was independently associated with risk of urethroplasty failure-50-59 (hazard ratio [HR] 2.39; P = .02), 60-69 (HR 2.80; P = .009), and ≥70 (HR 3.43; P = .003). CONCLUSION: Urethroplasty is safe and effective in the majority of elderly men. Early reconstructive intervention with anastomotic urethroplasty or urethrostomy techniques may optimize outcomes. Voiding dysfunction and prostatic obstruction are common in this population and should be pursued as clinically indicated.
OBJECTIVE: To report stricture characteristics, complications, and treatment outcomes among elderly men undergoing urethral reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of urethroplasty cases and outcomes by a single surgeon from 2007 to 2014 was performed. Men were stratified by decade of life at time of surgery (<50, 50-59, 60-69, ≥70 years). Individuals with a history of hypospadias were excluded. RESULTS: Among 514 urethroplasty procedures, 184 (36%) were evaluated in men ≥60 years. When stratified by decade of life, elderly men were more likely to have a history of radiation therapy (0% vs 5% vs 19% vs 50%; P <.0001) and experience treatment failure (6% vs 16% vs 20% vs 26%; P <.0001) during follow-up (median 63 months). The estimated 60-month stricture recurrence-free survival decreased with increasing age at time of urethroplasty (94% vs 89% vs 78% vs 74%; P <.0001). In patients ≥60 years, success rates of anastomotic, substitution, and urethrostomy techniques were 80%, 65%, and 88%; anastomotic urethroplasty success improved after excluding those patients with prior radiation. After surgery, elderly were more likely to have voiding dysfunction and <90-day Clavien ≥3 complications requiring endoscopic intervention. On multivariable analysis, advancing age per decade beyond 50 years was independently associated with risk of urethroplasty failure-50-59 (hazard ratio [HR] 2.39; P = .02), 60-69 (HR 2.80; P = .009), and ≥70 (HR 3.43; P = .003). CONCLUSION: Urethroplasty is safe and effective in the majority of elderly men. Early reconstructive intervention with anastomotic urethroplasty or urethrostomy techniques may optimize outcomes. Voiding dysfunction and prostatic obstruction are common in this population and should be pursued as clinically indicated.
Authors: Ryan A Dornbier; Eric J Kirshenbaum; Marc H Nelson; Robert H Blackwell; Gopal N Gupta; Ahmer V Farooq; Christopher M Gonzalez Journal: World J Urol Date: 2019-02-27 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Michael T Davenport; Jeffrey T Wooliscroft; Maxim J McKibben; Nabeel Shakir; Joceline S Fuchs; Yooni A Yi; Boyd R Viers; Rachel L Bergeson; Ellen E Ward; Allen F Morey Journal: Transl Androl Urol Date: 2020-02
Authors: Keith F Rourke; Blayne Welk; Ron Kodama; Greg Bailly; Tim Davies; Nancy Santesso; Philippe D Violette Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 2.052