Literature DB >> 29221617

Minor procedure, major impact: Patient-reported outcomes following urethral meatotomy.

Briony K Varda1, Tanya Logvinenko2, Stuart Bauer2, Bartley Cilento2, Richard N Yu2, Caleb P Nelson2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Urethral meatotomy as treatment for meatal stenosis is a common pediatric urology procedure; however, little is known about the patient experience following this procedure.
OBJECTIVE: We aim to evaluate clinical factors associated with patient-reported symptom improvement after urethral meatotomy. STUDY
DESIGN: The families of boys undergoing urethral meatotomy between 2/2013 and 8/2016 received a survey by mail 6 weeks after surgery. Families were queried on changes in symptoms using a Likert-type scale (5 = much improved, 4 = somewhat improved, 3 = no change, 2 = somewhat worse, and 1 = much worse). Patient and procedure characteristics of the respondents were obtained via chart review. These included surgical indication(s) (abnormal stream, dysuria, or storage symptoms), postoperative complications, reoperation, and unplanned postoperative communications. Patients who had procedures other than simple urethral meatotomy were excluded. Descriptive statistics were compiled, and generalized estimating equations used to determine the associations of patient and procedure characteristics with symptom improvement.
RESULTS: We sent 629 surveys and received 194 responses (30.4%). Twelve respondents were excluded for complex procedures or miscoding. The majority of respondents were privately insured (74%) and were between 5 and 12 years old (45%) or 1 and 4 years old (42%). The most frequent surgical indication was abnormal stream (72%) followed by pain (21%) and storage symptoms (15.5%). Nine respondents had minor complications (4.9%). Four patients had restenosis requiring repeat urethral meatotomy. After surgery, a majority (79%) were "much improved," 16% were "somewhat improved," 3% had "no change," and 1% were "somewhat worse." No family reported "much worse." Those patients who had "abnormal stream" as a surgical indication were significantly more likely to report "much improved" (OR 1.83, p = 0.014) than those without. Patient-reported improvement was not associated with suture use, patient age, insurance, surgeon, or location of the procedure (Table). DISCUSSION: Little has been written about patient-reported outcomes following urethral meatotomy. Our study affirms that the majority of boys improve following this procedure. However, improvement is significantly more likely if the child has a preoperative indication of an abnormal stream, such as deflection or spraying. Boys with symptoms of dysuria, frequency, or incontinence may be experiencing sequelae of meatal stenosis that simply take longer to improve. Alternatively, the meatal stenosis may be incidental to the primary symptoms.
CONCLUSIONS: A majority of families report substantial symptomatic improvement after urethral meatotomy. However, boys undergoing urethral meatotomy for reasons other than a urinary stream abnormality are less likely to experience improvement.
Copyright © 2017 Journal of Pediatric Urology Company. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Meatotomy; Patient-reported outcomes; Voiding dysfunction

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29221617      PMCID: PMC5957770          DOI: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2017.10.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pediatr Urol        ISSN: 1477-5131            Impact factor:   1.830


  13 in total

1.  Urethral meatotomy in the office using topical EMLA cream for anesthesia.

Authors:  P C Cartwright; B W Snow; D C McNees
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Tailored sutureless meatoplasty: a new technique for correcting meatal stenosis.

Authors:  Jimena Cubillos; Arvin George; Jordan Gitlin; Lane S Palmer
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2010-10-25       Impact factor: 1.830

3.  Incidence of meatal stenosis following neonatal circumcision in a primary care setting.

Authors:  Robert S Van Howe
Journal:  Clin Pediatr (Phila)       Date:  2006 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.168

4.  Meatal stenosis: a retrospective analysis of over 4000 patients.

Authors:  Shelley P Godley; Renea M Sturm; Blythe Durbin-Johnson; Eric A Kurzrock
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2015-02-04       Impact factor: 1.830

5.  Incidence of asymptomatic meatal stenosis in children following neonatal circumcision.

Authors:  Marjan Joudi; Mehdi Fathi; Mehran Hiradfar
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2010-09-18       Impact factor: 1.830

6.  Post circumcision meatal stenosis: 12 years' experience.

Authors:  V Upadhyay; H M Hammodat; P W Pease
Journal:  N Z Med J       Date:  1998-02-27

7.  The standardization of terminology of lower urinary tract function in children and adolescents: Update report from the standardization committee of the International Children's Continence Society.

Authors:  Paul F Austin; Stuart B Bauer; Wendy Bower; Janet Chase; Israel Franco; Piet Hoebeke; Søren Rittig; Johan Vande Walle; Alexander von Gontard; Anne Wright; Stephen S Yang; Tryggve Nevéus
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2015-03-14       Impact factor: 2.696

8.  The efficacy of LMX versus EMLA for pain relief in boys undergoing office meatotomy.

Authors:  D Preston Smith; Mary Gjellum
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Lubrication of circumcision site for prevention of meatal stenosis in children younger than 2 years old.

Authors:  Hassan Bazmamoun; Manoochehr Ghorbanpour; Seyed Habibollah Mousavi-Bahar
Journal:  Urol J       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.510

10.  Evaluation of meatal stenosis following neonatal circumcision.

Authors:  Hossein Mahmoudi
Journal:  Urol J       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 1.510

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.