4.4 Article

Direct Vision Internal Urethrotomy for Short Anterior Urethral Strictures and Beyond: Success Rates, Predictors of Treatment Failure, and Recurrence Management

Journal

UROLOGY
Volume 106, Issue -, Pages 210-215

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.04.037

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE To determine success rates, predictors of recurrence, and recurrence management of patients treated for short anterior urethral strictures by direct vision internal urethrotomy (DVIU). MATERIALS AND METHODS We identified 128 patients who underwent DVIU of the anterior urethra between December 2009 and March 2016. Follow-up was conducted by telephone interviews. Success rates were assessed by Kaplan-Meier estimators. Predictors of stricture recurrence and different further therapy strategies were identified by uni- and multivariable Cox regression analyses. RESULTS The mean age was 63.8 years (standard deviation: 16.3) and the overall success rate was 51.6% (N = 66) at a median follow-up of 16 months (interquartile range: 6-43). Median time to stricture recurrence was six months (interquartile range: 2-12). In uni- and multivariable analyses, only repeat DVIU (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.13-3.11, P = .015; and HR = 1.78, 95% CI = 1.05-3.03, P = .032, respectively) was a risk factor for recurrence. Of 62 patients with recurrence, 35.5% underwent urethroplasty, 29% underwent further endoscopic treatment, and 33.9% did not undergo further interventional therapy. Age (HR = 1.05, 95% CI = 1.01-1.09, P = .019) and diabetes (HR = 2.90, 95% CI = 1.02-8.26, P = .047) were predictors of no further interventional therapy. CONCLUSION DVIU seems justifiable in short urethral strictures as a primary treatment. Prior DVIU was a risk factor for recurrence. In case of recurrence, about one-third of the patients did not undergo any further therapy. Higher age and diabetes predicted the denial of any further treatment. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available