Top

BMC Urology

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Wound Dehiscence | Research

Buccal versus skin graft for two-stage repair of complex hypospadias: an Egyptian center experience

Authors: Salah E. Shebl, Mabrouk M. Akl, Mohamed Abdalrazek

Published in: BMC Urology | Issue 1/2022

Abstract

Background

Urethral reconstruction in complex hypospadias poses a significant challenge. We report our 10-year experience with buccal mucosa graft (BMG) in the two-stage repair of complex hypospadias and compare its results to the skin graft.

Methods

We retrieved the data of 15 patients with complex hypospadias who underwent two-stage repair using the BMG at our institution. The data were compared to 13 patients who underwent skin graft during the same period.

Results

The median follow-up duration was 14 (12–17) months in the BMG group and 16 (13.5–22.5) months in the skin graft group. Patients in the BMG had a numerically lower incidence of the diverticulum, wound dehiscence, fistula, and infection than the skin graft group, however, without statistically significant difference (p > 0.05). On the other hand, the incidence of meatal stenosis and urethral stricture was significantly lower in the BMG group (0% each) compared to the skin graft group (30.8% each; p = 0.02). At the same time, there were no reported cases of graft contracture. The frequency of donor site morbidity was significantly higher in the skin graft group compared to the BMG group (p = 0.003). The BMG led to a lower incidence of postoperative straining than the skin graft (0% vs. 38.5%, p = 0.03). Only one patient needed revision surgery after skin graft, compared to no case in the BMG (p = 0.27).

Conclusion

The present study demonstrates the feasibility and durable outcomes of the BMG in the setting of two-stage repair of complex hypospadias.

Kalfa N, Sultan C, Baskin LS. Hypospadias: etiology and current research. Urol Clin North Am. 2010;37:159–66.CrossRef

Springer A, van den Heijkant M, Baumann S. Worldwide prevalence of hypospadias. J Pediatr Urol. 2016;12:152.e1-152.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2015.12.002.CrossRef

Kulkarni SB, Joglekar O, Alkandari MH, Joshi PM. Redo hypospadias surgery: current and novel techniques. Res Rep Urol. 2018;10:117–26. https://doi.org/10.2147/RRU.S142989.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Sullivan KJ, Hunter Z, Andrioli V, et al. Assessing quality of life of patients with hypospadias: a systematic review of validated patient-reported outcome instruments. J Pediatr Urol. 2017;13:19–27.CrossRef

Bracka A. The role of two-stage repair in modern hypospadiology. Indian J Urol. 2008;24:210. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-1591.40618.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Bracka A. A versatile two-stage hypospadias repair. Br J Plast Surg. 1995;48:345–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-1226(95)90023-3.CrossRefPubMed

Van Der Werff JFA, Van Der Meulen JC. Treatment modalities for hypospadias cripples. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;105:600–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-200002000-00019.CrossRefPubMed

JAVA. Declaration of Helsinki world medical association declaration of Helsinki. Bull world Heal Organ. 2013;79(373–374):S0042-96862001000400020.

Eppley BL, Keating M, Rink R. A buccal mucosal harvesting technique for urethral reconstruction. J Urol. 1997;157:1268–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)64947-4.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Webster GD, Brown MW, Koefoot RB, Sihelnick S. Suboptimal results in full thickness skin graft urethroplasty using an extrapenile skin donor site. J Urol. 1984;131:1082–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)50820-4.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Mungadi IA, Ugboko VI. Oral mucosa grafts for urethral reconstruction. Ann Afr Med. 2009;8:203–9.CrossRef

12.

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

13.

Hansson E, Becker M, Aberg M, Svensson H. Analysis of complications after repair of hypospadias. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 2007;41:120–4.CrossRef

14.

Spilotros M, Sihra N, Malde S, et al. Buccal mucosal graft urethroplasty in men-risk factors for recurrence and complications: a third referral centre experience in anterior urethroplasty using buccal mucosal graft. Transl Androl Urol. 2017;6:510–6. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau.2017.03.69.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Navai N, Erickson BA, Zhao LC, et al. Complications following urethral reconstructive surgery: a 6 year experience. Int braz j urol. 2008;34:594–601. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-55382008000500008.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Hensle TW, Kearney MC, Bingham JB, et al. Buccal mucosa grafts for hypospadias surgery: long-term results. J Urol. 2002;108(4 Part 2):1734–7.CrossRef

17.

Tonnhofer U, Hiess M, Metzelder M, et al. Midline Incision of a graft in staged hypospadias repair-feasible and durable? Front Pediatr. 2019;0:60. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPED.2019.00060.CrossRef

18.

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.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Maarouf AM, Elsayed ER, Ragab A, et al. Buccal versus lingual mucosal graft urethroplasty for complex hypospadias repair. J Pediatr Urol. 2013;9:754–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpurol.2012.08.013.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Tahmeedullah A, Khan AT, Obaidullah A. Comparison of prepucial skin, postauricular skin and buccal mucosal graft results in hypospadias repair. J Coll Phys Surg Pakistan. 2003;13:515–8.

Title: Buccal versus skin graft for two-stage repair of complex hypospadias: an Egyptian center experience
Authors: Salah E. Shebl
Mabrouk M. Akl
Mohamed Abdalrazek
Publication date: 01-12-2022
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keywords: Wound Dehiscence
Hypospadia
Skin Graft
Urethra Reconstruction
Urethral Stricture
Published in: BMC Urology / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2490
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-022-01069-6

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Buccal versus skin graft for two-stage repair of complex hypospadias: an Egyptian center experience

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Cross-cultural differences in men on active surveillance’ anxiety: a longitudinal comparison between Italian and Dutch patients from the Prostate cancer Research International Active Surveillance study

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: Can retroperitoneal approach suit for renal tumors of all locations?—A large retrospective cohort study

Evaluation of cystoprostatectomy on patients with prostate cancer extending to bladder: a retrospective study from single center

Is endourological intervention a suitable treatment option in the management of iatrogenic thermal ureteral injury? A contemporary case series

External validation of the T.O.HO. score as predictor of success after retrograde intrarenal surgery

Reliability assessment of the upper urinary tract dilation grading system based on magnetic resonance urography in patients with neurogenic bladder