Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2014 Oct;84(4):928-32; quiz 932-3.
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.05.047. Epub 2014 Aug 14.

Revision urethroplasty success is comparable to primary urethroplasty: a comparative analysis

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Revision urethroplasty success is comparable to primary urethroplasty: a comparative analysis

Max A Levine et al. Urology. 2014 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the efficacy and complications of revision urethroplasty compared with urethroplasty-naïve controls.

Materials and methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of 534 urethroplasties performed by a single surgeon from August 2003 to March 2011. Patient age, stricture length, location, etiology, comorbidities, and type of surgery were recorded. Statistical comparison between the revision cohort and urethroplasty-naïve group were made using Fisher, χ(2), and unpaired t tests, with significance at P < .05 (2-tailed). The primary outcome was urethral patency assessed by cystoscopy. Secondary (subjective) outcome measures included erectile dysfunction, pain, urinary tract infection, or chordee at 6 months.

Results: A total of 476 patients met inclusion criteria with completed cystoscopic follow-up. Previous urethroplasty had failed in 49 patients (10.3%). Patients undergoing revision urethroplasty were more likely to have stricture in the penile urethra (22.4%; P = .001), to have strictures exceeding 4 cm in length (71.4% vs 54.3%; P = .023), and to require tissue transfer (83.6% vs 65.1%; P = .010). Urethral patency rates did not differ significantly between naïve and revision urethroplasty cohorts, with a mean follow-up of 49.9 months (94.6% vs 91.8%; P = .518). The revision group had a higher incidence of chordee (2.7% vs 14.3%; P = .001) and urinary tract infection (3.5% vs 10.2%; P = .04). The rates of erectile dysfunction, scrotal pain, lower urinary tract symptoms, and incontinence did not differ significantly between the 2 groups.

Conclusion: Revision urethroplasty is an effective treatment option for recurrent stricture after urethroplasty and is comparable to results in urethroplasty-naïve patients. Patients undergoing revision urethroplasty are more likely to require tissue transfer and experience higher rates of chordee and urinary tract infection.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Reply: To PMID 25129537.
    Rourke KF. Rourke KF. Urology. 2014 Oct;84(4):933. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.05.051. Epub 2014 Aug 14. Urology. 2014. PMID: 25129538 No abstract available.
  • Editorial comment.
    Myers JB, Hotaling JM, Brant WO. Myers JB, et al. Urology. 2014 Oct;84(4):933. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.05.050. Epub 2014 Aug 14. Urology. 2014. PMID: 25129541 No abstract available.

Publication types