Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating the Results of Hypospadias Repair: What? Why? When? And How?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Hypospadiology

Abstract

Hypospadias is one of the most common congenital urogenital deformities affecting male children. Traditionally, the objective of all hypospadias repairs was to achieve a straight penis with the meatus at the tip thereby facilitating voiding in a standing position as well as satisfactory intercourse. In modern hypospadias repair, surgeons also aim to achieve good cosmetic outcomes in addition to a functionally normal penis.

Myriad techniques have been described for hypospadias repair and most display similar efficacy hence the burden of choice lies with the surgeon’s preference and expertise. Consequently, it is important for surgeons performing hypospadias repair to keep detailed records and routinely reassess their approach by evaluating patient outcomes. Indeed, since complication rates following hypospadias surgery remain very high, thorough record-keeping and retrospective evaluation is vital to achieving the best possible results. Complications of hypospadias repair can be either immediate or delayed, and hence long follow-up is imperative. Answering the questions What? Why? When? and How? is key to effective monitoring of postoperative outcomes.

In this chapter, we provide an in-depth analysis of the hypospadias evaluation process and attempt to answer the aforementioned questions. We discuss key factors influencing the success of hypospadias surgery and appraise current methods of evaluating repair outcomes. We also outline the different assessment models proposed in the literature as well as their application to general practice. Furthermore, we address the impact of hypospadias surgery on psychological aspects of patient development, as well as future reproductive potential. Finally, we discuss future opportunities to optimize long-term follow-up and data capture to support patient counseling and surgical decision-making, and improve the standardization of research studies. (See Video 8.1).

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. van der Horst HJR, de Wall LL. Hypospadias, all there is to know. Eur J Pediatr. 2017;176:435–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-017-2864-5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Kraft KH, Shukla AR, Canning DA. Hypospadias. Urol Clin N Am. 2010;37:167–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2010.03.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Abbas TO. An objective hypospadias classification system. J Pediatr Urol. 2022;18(4):481.e1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JPUROL.2022.05.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bush NC, Villanueva C, Snodgrass W. Glans size is an independent risk factor for urethroplasty complications after hypospadias repair. J Pediatr Urol. 2015;11:355.e1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2015.05.029.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Aboutaleb H. Role of the urethral plate characters in the success of tubularized incised plate urethroplasty. Indian J Plast Surg. 2014;47:227. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-0358.138956.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Abbas TO, Braga LH, Spinoit AF, Salle JP. Urethral plate quality assessment and its impact on hypospadias repair outcomes: a systematic review and quality assessment. J Pediatr Urol. 2021;17(3):316–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2021.02.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Abbas TO, Vallasciani S, Elawad A, Elifranji M, Leslie B, Elkadhi A, et al. Plate Objective Scoring Tool (POST); an objective methodology for the assessment of urethral plate in distal hypospadias. J Pediatr Urol. 2020;16:675–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2020.07.043.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Abbas TO. The Plate Objective Scoring Tool (POST): further reflections and extended applications. Res Rep Urol. 2021;13:783–91. https://doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S321188.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Abbas TO, Hatem M, Chandra P. Plate Objective Scoring Tool: a new preoperative indicator of penile curvature degree in children with distal hypospadias. Int J Urol. 2022;29(6):511–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.14822.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Abosena W, Talab SS, Hanna MK. Recurrent chordee in 59 adolescents and young adults following childhood hypospadias repair. J Pediatr Urol. 2020;16:162.e1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2019.11.013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Keays MA, Dave S. Current hypospadias management: diagnosis, surgical management, and long-term patient-centred outcomes. Can Urol Assoc J. 2017;11:S48–53. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.4386.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Ulman I, Erikçi V, Avanoğlu A, Gökdemir A. The effect of suturing technique and material on complication rate following hypospadias repair. Eur J Pediatr Surg. 1997;7:156–7. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1071079.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Titley OG, Bracka A. A 5-year audit of trainees experience and outcomes with two-stage hypospadias surgery. Br J Plast Surg. 1998;51:370–5. https://doi.org/10.1054/bjps.1997.0157.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Manzoni G, Bracka A, Palminteri E, Marrocco G. Hypospadias surgery: when, what and by whom? BJU Int. 2004;94:1188–95. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.2004.05128.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hakim S, Merguerian PA, Rabinowitz R, Shortliffe LD, McKenna PH. Outcome analysis of the modified Mathieu hypospadias repair: comparison of stented and unstented repairs. J Urol. 1996;156:836–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Waterman BJ, Renschler T, Cartwright PC, Snow BW, de Vries CR. Variables in successful repair of urethrocutaneous fistula after hypospadias surgery. J Urol. 2002;168:726–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64734-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Van Savage JG, Palanca LG, Slaughenhoupt BL. A prospective randomized trial of dressings versus no dressings for hypospadias repair. J Urol. 2000;164:981–3. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005392-200009020-00015.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Singh R, Pavithran N, Parameswaran R. Knotting of feeding tube used for bladder drainage in hypospadias repair. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg. 2005;10:199. https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-9261.16979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gangopadhyay A, Sharma S. Peha-haft bandage as a new dressing for pediatric hypospadias repair. Indian J Plast Surg. 2005;38:162. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-0358.19790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Prasad MM, Marks A, Vasquez E, Yerkes EB, Cheng EY. Published surgical success rates in pediatric urology—fact or fiction? J Urol. 2012;188:1643–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.032.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Springer A. Assessment of outcome in hypospadias surgery—a review. Front Pediatr. 2014;2:2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2014.00002.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Mureau MAM, Slijper FME, Slob AK, Verhulst FC, Nijman RJM. Satisfaction with penile appearance after hypospadias surgery: the patient and surgeon view. J Urol. 1996;155:703–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)66504-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hadidi AT, Azmy AF, editors. Hypospadias surgery. An illustrated guide. Berlin: Springer; 2004. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.4764.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. Holland AJ, Smith GH, Ross FI, Cass DT. HOSE: an objective scoring system for evaluating the results of hypospadias surgery. BJU Int. 2001;88:255–8. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.2001.02280.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Weber DM, Schönbucher VB, Landolt MA, Gobet R. The Pediatric penile perception score: an instrument for patient self-assessment and surgeon evaluation after hypospadias repair. J Urol. 2008;180:1080–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2008.05.060.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. van der Toorn F, de Jong TP, de Gier RP, Callewaert PR, van der Horst EH, Steffens MG, et al. Introducing the HOPE (Hypospadias Objective Penile Evaluation)-Score: a validation study of an objective scoring system for evaluating cosmetic appearance in hypospadias patients. J Pediatr Urol. 2013;9(6):1006–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JPUROL.2013.01.015.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Page RE, Akin Y. Assessment of urine flow in hypospadias. Br J Plast Surg. 1978;31:313–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0007-1226(78)90117-0.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Oztorun Cİ, Tiryaki HT. Comparision of uroflow parameters before and after hypospadias surgery. Ann Pediatr Surg. 2018;14:27–30. https://doi.org/10.4314/aps.v14i1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. González R, Ludwikowski BM. Importance of urinary flow studies after hypospadias repair: a systematic review. Int J Urol. 2011;18:757–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2042.2011.02839.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Jiao C, Wu R, Xu X, Yu Q. Long-term outcome of penile appearance and sexual function after hypospadias repairs: situation and relation. Int Urol Nephrol. 2011;43:47–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-010-9775-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Han JH, Lee JH, Jun J, Park MU, Lee JS, Park S, et al. Validity and reliability of a home-based, guardian-conducted video voiding test for voiding evaluation after hypospadias surgery. Investig Clin Urol. 2020;61:425–31. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2020.61.4.425.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Singh JC, Jayanthi VR, Gopalakrishnan G. Effect of hypospadias on sexual function and reproduction. Indian J Urol. 2008;24:249–52. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.40623.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Hoag CC, Gotto GT, Morrison KB, Coleman GU, Macneily AE. Long-term functional outcome and satisfaction of patients with hypospadias repaired in childhood. Can Urol Assoc J. 2008;2:23–31. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.521.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Rosen RC, Cappelleri JC, Gendrano N. The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF): a state-of-the-science review. Int J Impot Res. 2002;14:226–44. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ijir.3900857.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Rynja SP, Wouters GA, Van Schaijk M, Kok ET, De Jong TP, De Kort LM. Long-term followup of hypospadias: functional and cosmetic results. J Urol. 2009;182:1736–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.03.073.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Bhat A, Mandal AK. Acute postoperative complications of hypospadias repair. Indian J Urol. 2008;24:241–8. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.40622.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Barbagli G, De Angelis M, Palminteri E, Lazzeri M. Failed hypospadias repair presenting in adults. Eur Urol. 2006;49:887–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2006.01.027.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Duel BP, Barthold JS, Gonzalez R. Management of urethral strictures after hypospadias repair. J Urol. 1998;160(1):170–1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Tack LJW, Springer A, Riedl S, Tonnhofer U, Hiess M, Weninger J, et al. Adolescent and young adult urogenital outcome following childhood hypospadias repair: perfection revisited. J Urol. 2021;206:734–44. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001869.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Thiry S, Saussez T, Dormeus S, Tombal B, Wese FX, Feyaerts A. Long-term functional, cosmetic and sexual outcomes of hypospadias correction performed in childhood. Urol Int. 2015;95:137–41. https://doi.org/10.1159/000430500.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Powell CR, Mcaleer I, Alagiri M, Kaplan GW. Comparison of flaps versus grafts in proximal hypospadias surgery. J Urol. 2000;163:1286–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Hisamatsu E, Sugita Y, Haruna A, Shibata R, Yoshino K. The learning curve in proximal hypospadias repair. J Pediatr Urol. 2021;17:330.e1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2021.01.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Uygur MC, Unal D, Tan MO, Germiyanoğlu C, Erol D. Factors affecting outcome of one-stage anterior hypospadias repair: analysis of 422 cases. Pediatr Surg Int. 2002;18:142–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003830100657.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Elbakry A, Shamaa M, Al-Atrash G. An axially vascularized meatal-based flap for the repair of hypospadias. Br J Urol. 1998;82:698–703. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-410x.1998.00819.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Nonomura K, Kakizaki H, Shimoda N, Koyama T, Murakumo M, Koyanagi T. Surgical repair of anterior hypospadias with fish-mouth meatus and intact prepuce based on anatomical characteristics. Eur Urol. 1998;34:368–71. https://doi.org/10.1159/000019742.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Kass EJ, Bolong D. Single stage hypospadias reconstruction without fistula. J Urol. 1990;144:520–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5347(17)39510-1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Shirazi M, Noorafshan A, Serhan A, Serhan A. Effects of different suture materials used for the repair of hypospadias: a stereological study in a rat model. Urol Int. 2012;89:395–401. https://doi.org/10.1159/000343423.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Lay L, Zamboni WA, Texter JH, Zook EG. Analysis of hypospadias and fistula repair. Am Surg. 1995;61:537–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Elbakry A. Complications of the preputial island flap-tube urethroplasty. BJU Int. 1999;84:89–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Chin TW, Liu CS, Wei CF. Hypospadias repair using a double onlay preputial flap. Pediatr Surg Int. 2001;17:496–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003830000566.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Kamal BA. Double dartos flaps in tubularized incised plate hypospadias repair. Urology. 2005;66:1095–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2005.05.020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Bethell GS, Chhabra S, Shalaby MS, Corbett H, Kenny SE, BAPS NOAH Contributors. Parental decisional satisfaction after hypospadias repair in the United Kingdom. J Pediatr Urol. 2020;16:164.e1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2020.01.005.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Ludovica D, Bianco M, Pelizzari A, Mandato F, Esposito C, Castagnetti M. Self-reported outcomes after the onset of puberty in patients undergoing primary distal hypospadias repair by the tubularized incised plate technique combined with preputial reconstruction vs. circumcision: a norm related study. J Pediatr Surg. 2021;56:1411–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2020.11.024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Bracka A. A long-term view of hypospadias. Br J Plast Surg. 1989;42:251–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Husmann DA. Erectile dysfunction in patients undergoing multiple attempts at hypospadias repair: etiologies and concerns. J Pediatr Urol. 2021;17:166.e1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2020.12.002.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. van der Werff JF, Ultee J. Long-term follow-up of hypospadias repair. Br J Plast Surg. 2000;53:588–92. https://doi.org/10.1054/bjps.2000.3395.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Abbas TO, AbdelMoniem M, Chowdhury M. Automated quantification of penile curvature using artificial intelligence. Front Artif Intell. 2022;5:954497. https://doi.org/10.3389/FRAI.2022.954497.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Fernandez N, Lorenzo AJ, Rickard M, Chua M, Pippi-Salle JL, Perez J, et al. Digital pattern recognition for the identification and classification of hypospadias using artificial intelligence vs experienced Pediatric urologist. Urology. 2021;147:264–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2020.09.019.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Rourke K, Braga LH. Transitioning patients with hypospadias and other penile abnormalities to adulthood: what to expect? Can Urol Assoc J. 2018;12:S27–33. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.5227.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Woud SG, van Rooij IALM, van Gelder MMHJ, Olney RS, Carmichael SL, Roeleveld N, et al. Differences in risk factors for second and third degree hypospadias in the national birth defects prevention study. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2014;100:703–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdra.23296.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. van Rooij IALM, van der Zanden LFM, Brouwers MM, Knoers NVAM, Feitz WFJ, Roeleveld N. Risk factors for different phenotypes of hypospadias: results from a Dutch case-control study. BJU Int. 2013;112:121–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11745.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Kukkonen TM, Binik YM, Amsel R, Carrier S. Thermography as a physiological measure of sexual arousal in both men and women. J Sex Med. 2007;4:93–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2006.00399.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Kogan BA, Feustel PJ. What can we learn from pediatric urology certification logs? Urology. 2011;78:147–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2010.12.078.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Takvani Kidney Hospital, Junagadh, India

    Anil Takvani

  2. National Institute of Medical Sciences, Jaipur, India

    Mahakshit Bhat

Authors
  1. Anil Takvani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mahakshit Bhat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Sidra Medicine, Doha, Qatar

    Tariq Abbas

8.1 Electronic Supplementary Material

(MP4 4901 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Takvani, A., Bhat, M. (2023). Evaluating the Results of Hypospadias Repair: What? Why? When? And How?. In: Abbas, T. (eds) Hypospadiology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-7666-7_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-7666-7_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-19-7665-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-19-7666-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation