Urethral Stricture Percentages

Stricture type Procedure N Stricture free interval/rate Notes Study
PFUDDs Anastomotic 51 63% at 1 yr

55% at 5  yrs

43% at 10 yrs

  Culty et al.

J Urol April 2007

177; 1374-1377

Bulbar BMG dorsal onlay 107 80% at 74 months Strictures recurred at anastomotic site Barbagli et al.

J Urol Aug 2006

176; 614-619

Bulbar Anastomotic

 

82

 

88% at 5 yrs

87% at 10 yrs

86% at 15 yrs

Mundy study Andrich et al.

J Urol July 2003

170; 90-92

  Substitution

Urethroplasty

84 79% at 5 yrs

69% at 10 yrs

42% at 15 yrs

Complication rate 33% Same as above
Bulbar 1.5cm Roof strip anast + ventral onlay  OR

Floor strip anast +

Dorsal onlay

29 93% at 28 months Onlays: skin flap or graft Guralnick, Webster

J Urol May 2001

165; 1496-1501

Bulbar 1.7cm Anastomotic 168

 

95% at 70 months 5% recurrence treated with DVIU/dilation Santucci, McAninch

J Urol April 2002

167; 1715-1719

Bulbar FTSG (penis) dorsal onlay 29 97% at 19 months Graft length 6cm x 1.5-3cm Iselin, Webster

J Urol Marc 1999

161;815-818

BXO 1 stage dorsal BMG onlay

2 stage BMG onlay

25

 

14

88% at 32 months

71% at 32 mo

  Dubey et al

J Urol feb 2005

173;463-466

Anterior 9cm Penile circular fasciocutaneous flap 66 79% at 41 months Recurrent sx treated w/ DVIU/dilation or urethroplasty McAninch Morey

J Urol April 1998

159;1209-1213

Anterior

8.2cm

Penile circular fasciocutaneous flap 124 95% at 1 yr

84% at 5yrs

79% at 10 yrs

Smoking, hypospadi, stricture > 7cm predictive of failing Whitson et al

J Urol June 2008

179;2259-2264

Bulbar EPA 153 90.8% at 68 months 23% ejac dysfxn

20% dec glans sens.

11% soft glans

Barbagli et al

J Urol Dec 2007

178;2470-2473

Bulbar 3.6cm BMG Ventral onlay 53 94.3% at 25 months Multi-institution

Overall complication rate 5.4%

Kane et al

J Urol March 2002

167;1314-1317

Bulbar 3.8cm EPA for > 2.5cm

EPA for < 2.5cm

11

11

91% for both at 22 months No difference in erectile complaints Morey Kizer

J Urol June 2006

175;2145-2149

Penile <1cm hypospadias DVIU vs

DVIU CIC 2 yr f/u

72 Tube graft 0%

Tube flap 11%

Onlay 63%

CIC does not help

Tube graft/flaps suck

DVIU ok for onaly

Husmann et al

J Urol Oct 2006

176;1738-1741

Bulbomem radiation induced EPA, FC flap, BMG 30 73% at 21 months XRT, brachy

Incont 40%

13% needed AUS

Meeks et al

J Urol may 2011

185;1761-1765

Bulbar 4cm BMG dorsal (27), ventral (17), lat (6) onlay 50 Overall 84% (42 months f/u)

Dorsal 85%

Ventral 83%

Lateral 83%

Can put BMG anywhere for bulbar strictures Barbagli et al

J Urol Sept 2005

174;955-958

Bulbar 3.3cm BMG dorsal inlay + BMG ventral onlay 73 88% at 49 months No erectile side effects Palminteri et al

J Urol May 2011

185;1766-1771

Bulbar > 4cm (5.3) Ventral onlay 105 80% at 48 months 71% failed within 1 yr

82% failed within 2 yr

Pending
Bulbar > 4cm (6.2cm) BMG ventral onlay + FTSG dorsal inlay 15 85% at 18 months   Pending

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: