Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Standing the test of time: the long-term results of urethroplasty

  • Topic Paper
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The principle indication for urethral surgery is stricture disease. There are a number of factors that influence the outcome of surgery including location of the stricture, stricture length, aetiology, previous surgery and selection of procedure. Outcomes for different techniques are summarised. The gold standard remains anastomotic urethroplasty, where appropriate, with patch urethroplasty or two-stage stage procedures for more complicated strictures especially the penile urethra.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andrich D, Dakum N, Holden F, Greenwell T, Mundy A (2005) Restricture rates after revision urethroplasty. Abstract 748. EAU Congress

  2. Andrich DE, Dunglison N, Greenwell TJ, Mundy AR (2003) The long-term results of urethroplasty. J Urol 170:90–92

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Andrich DE, Leach CJ, Mundy AR (2001) The Barbagli procedure gives the best results for patch urethroplasty of the bulbar urethra. BJU Int 88:385–389

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Andrich DE, Mundy AR (2000) Urethral strictures and their surgical management. BJU Int 86:571–580

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Andrich DE, Mundy AR (2004) Urethral stricture surgery: the state-of-the-art. In: Kirby RS, O’Leary MP (eds) Hot topics in urology. Elsevier, London

    Google Scholar 

  6. Andrich DE, O’Malley KJ, Summerton DJ, Greenwell TJ, Mundy AR (2003) The type of urethroplasty for a pelvic fracture urethral distraction defect cannot be predicted preoperatively. J Urol 170:464–467

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Badlini G, Press SM, Dafaclo A, Oesterling JE, Smith AD (1995) Urolume endourethral prosthesis for the treatment of urethral stricture disease: long-term results of the North American Multicenter Urolume Trial. Urology 45(5):846–856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Barbagli G, Lazzeri M, Palminteri E, Turini D (1999) Lichen sclerosus of male genitalia involving the anterior urethra. Lancet 354:429

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Barbagli G, Palminteri E, Lazzeri M, Guazzoni G (2003) Anterior urethral strictures. BJU Int Eur Urol Update 92:497–505

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Barbagli G, Palminteri E, Lazzeri M, Turini D (2001) Lichen sclerosus of the male genitalia. Contemp Urol 13:47–58

    Google Scholar 

  11. Barbagli G, Selli C, Tosto A, Palminteri E (1996) Dorsal free graft urethroplasty. J Urol 155:123–126

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Boboroglu PG, Sands JP, Roberts JL, Amling CL (2000) Risk factors for vesicourethral anastomotic stricture after radical prostatectomy. Urology 56:96–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Carr LK, Webster GD (1996) Endoscopic management of the obliterated anastomosis following radical prostatectomy. J Urol 156:70–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Chambers R, Baitera B (1977) The anatomy of urethral stricture. Br J Urol 49:545–551

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. de Jong Z, Fouda PJ, Pontonnier F, Plante P (1990) Long-term results of the treatment of male urethral stricture. Ann Urol (Paris) 24:167–170

    Google Scholar 

  16. Devereux MH, Burfield GD (1970) Prolonged follow-up of urethral strictures treated by intermittent dilation. BJU 42:321–329

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Greenwell TJ, Venn SN, Mundy AR (1999) Changing practice in anterior urethroplasty. BJU Int 83:631–635

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Harriss D, Beckingham IJ, Lemberger RJ, Lawrence WT (1994) Long-term results of intermittent low-friction self catheterisation in patients with recurrent urethral strictures. Br J Urol 74(6):790–792

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Hermanowicz M, Massande J, Rossi D, Serment G, Richaud C, Ducassou J (1990) Long-term evaluation of the treatment of male urethral stenosis. Ann Urol (Paris) 24:68–72

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Heyns C, Steenkamp J, De Kock ML, Whitaker P (1998) Treatment of male urethral strictures: is repeated dilatation or internal urethrotomy useful? J Urol 160:356–358

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Jenkins BJ, Badenoch DF, Fowler CF, Blandy JP (1992) Long-term results of urethral injuries in males caused by external trauma. Br J Urol 70:73

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Johanson B (1953) Reconstruction of the male urethra in strictures. Acta Chir Scand 176:3

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kessler TM, Fisch M, Heitz M, Olianas R, Schreiter F (2002) Patient satisfaction with the outcome of surgery for urethral stricture. J Urol 167:2505–2511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Koratim MH (1995) The lessons of 145 post-traumatic posterior urethral strictures treated in 17 years. J Urol 153:63–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lewis JB, Wolgast KA, Ward JA, Morey AF (2002) Outpatient anterior urethroplasty: outcome analysis and patient selection criteria. JUrol 168:1024–1026

    Google Scholar 

  26. Milroy E, Allen A (1996) Long-term results of Urolume urothelial stent for recurrent urethral strictures. J Urol 155:904–908

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Milroy E, Chapple C, Wallsten H (1989) A new stent for the treatment of urethral strictures: preliminary report. Br J Urol 63:392–396

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Mundy AR (1993) Results and complications of urethroplasty and its future. Br J Urol 71:322–325

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Mundy AR (1995) The long-term results of skin inlay urethroplasty. Br J Urol 75:59–61

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Mundy AR (1997) Reconstruction of posterior urethral distraction defects. Urol Clin North Am 5:139

    Google Scholar 

  31. Mundy AR, Stephenson TP (1988) Pedicled preputial patch urethroplasty. Br J Urol 61:48–51

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Nissenkorn I, Shavel M (1997) Polyurethane stent for the treatment of urethral strictures. J Endourol 11(6):481–483

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Pansadoro V, Emiliozzi P (1996) Internal urethrotomy in the management of anterior urethral strictures: long-term follow-up. J Urol 156:73–75

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Quartey JK (1983) One-stage penile/preputial cutaneous island flap urethroplasty for urethral stricture: a preliminary report. J Urol 129:284–287

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Rogers HS, McNicholas TA, Blandy JP (1992) Long-term results of one-stage scrotal patch urethroplasty. Br J Urol 69:621–628

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Santucci RA, McAninch JW (2002) Urethral reconstruction of strictures resulting from treatment of benign prostatic hypertrophy and prostate cancer. Urol Clin N Am 29:417–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Steenkamp J, Heyns C, De Kock M (1997) Internal urethrotomy versus dilatation as treatment for male urethral strictures: a prospective, randomised comparison. J Urol 157:98–101

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Venn SN, Mundy AR (1998) Early experience with the use of buccal mucosa for substitution urethroplasty. Br J Urol 81:738–740

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Webster GD, Mathes GL, Selli C (1983) Prostatomembranous urethral injuries. A review of the literature and a rational approach to their management. J Urol 130:898–902

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Webster GD, Ramon J (1991) Repair of pelvic fracture posterior urethral defects using an elaborated perineal approach: experience with 74 cases. J Urol 145:744–748

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Wessells H, McAninch JW (1988) Current controversies in anterior urethral stricture repair: free-graft versus pedicled skin-flap reconstruction. World J Urol 16:175–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Wood D, Andrich DE, Allen S, Hussain M, Greenwell T, Mundy A (2005) A comparison of objective and subjective success of buccal mucosal graft (bmg) urethroplasty. Abstract 747. EAU Congress

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University College Hospital, 235 Euston Road, NW1 2BU, London, UK

    D. N. Wood, D. E. Andrich, T. J. Greenwell & A. R. Mundy

Authors
  1. D. N. Wood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. E. Andrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. J. Greenwell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. R. Mundy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. N. Wood.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wood, D., Andrich, D., Greenwell, T. et al. Standing the test of time: the long-term results of urethroplasty. World J Urol 24, 250–254 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-006-0057-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-006-0057-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation