A randomized prospective trial of primary versus AlloDerm closure of buccal mucosal graft harvest site for substitution urethroplasty
- PMID: 19962735
- DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2009.07.1226
A randomized prospective trial of primary versus AlloDerm closure of buccal mucosal graft harvest site for substitution urethroplasty
Abstract
Objectives: To present a prospective, randomized trial comparing primary and AlloDerm closure of the oral harvest site. The use of buccal mucosa grafts for substitution urethroplasty is an established and durable technique. The optimal management of the buccal mucosa grafts harvest site for the intraoral defect has yet to be determined.
Methods: Between February 2003 and September 2006, a total of 20 men undergoing buccal mucosal urethroplasty were randomly assigned to either primary (n = 10) or AlloDerm closure (n = 10) of the oral harvest site. All patients were clinically examined postoperatively and each completed a 10-point analog pain score and descriptive questionnaire postoperatively, at 3 weeks, and at 3, 6, and 12 months.
Results: A 100% of patients completed the study at 12 months follow-up. Oral pain dissipated acutely after 3 weeks. No significant differences in either neurosensory or mouth tightness symptoms were noted, except increased incidence of cheek swelling at 3 weeks in the AlloDerm group.
Conclusions: AlloDerm proved to be an effective means of closing the harvest site, but offered no significant advantages when compared with primary closure. AlloDerm closure was associated with increased morbidity in mouth tightness symptoms, cheek swelling, and discomfort while chewing food; only increased incidence of cheek swelling at 3 weeks was found to be significant. Despite its excellent molecular properties and nonimmunogenic nature, the role of AlloDerm graft use in closing the buccal mucosal harvest site appears to be an unnecessary step. Primary closure was extremely well tolerated in both short- and long-term follow-up, with minimal sequelae at 12 months.
2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
The morbidity of buccal mucosal graft harvest for urethroplasty and the effect of nonclosure of the graft harvest site on postoperative pain.J Urol. 2004 Aug;172(2):580-3. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000132846.01144.9f. J Urol. 2004. PMID: 15247736
-
Comparison of donor site intraoral morbidity after mucosal graft harvesting for urethral reconstruction.Urology. 2005 Oct;66(4):716-20. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.04.045. Urology. 2005. PMID: 16230123
-
Donor-site morbidity in buccal mucosa urethroplasty: lower lip or inner cheek?BJU Int. 2005 Sep;96(4):619-23. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05695.x. BJU Int. 2005. PMID: 16104921
-
Oral mucosa grafts for urethral reconstruction.Ann Afr Med. 2009 Oct-Dec;8(4):203-9. doi: 10.4103/1596-3519.59572. Ann Afr Med. 2009. PMID: 20139540 Review.
-
Buccal mucosal urethroplasty: is it the new gold standard?BJU Int. 2004 Jun;93(9):1191-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2003.04860.x. BJU Int. 2004. PMID: 15180603 Review.
Cited by
-
A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Buccal Mucosal Graft Harvest Site Non-Closure versus Closure in Patients Undergoing Urethral Reconstruction.World J Mens Health. 2022 Jan;40(1):116-126. doi: 10.5534/wjmh.200175. Epub 2021 Feb 15. World J Mens Health. 2022. PMID: 33663028 Free PMC article.
-
Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for recovery of erectile function after posterior urethral reconstruction.Int Urol Nephrol. 2011 Sep;43(3):755-61. doi: 10.1007/s11255-010-9870-0. Epub 2010 Nov 26. Int Urol Nephrol. 2011. PMID: 21110096 Clinical Trial.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources