4.6 Review

European Association of Urology Guidelines on Urethral Stricture Disease (Part 2): Diagnosis, Perioperative Management, and Follow-up in Males

Journal

EUROPEAN UROLOGY
Volume 80, Issue 2, Pages 201-212

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.05.032

Keywords

Urethra; Urethral stricture; Urethroplasty; Urethrotomy; Urethral dilatation; Diagnosis; Classification; Perioperative care; Follow-up; Guidelines

Funding

  1. Bayer Sa Nv
  2. Bayer
  3. Janssen
  4. Rubio
  5. SOBI
  6. Almirall S.A. Tamsin Greenwell: participation in a company-sponsored speaker's bureau of Allergan
  7. SPE Pharma
  8. Astellas
  9. Medtronic
  10. Contura
  11. educational meeting sponsorship towards the costs of the annual UCLH Basics and Advanced Urodynamics Courses from Laborie
  12. sponsorship of surgical education from Boston Scientific and Medtronic
  13. running costs of the annual Female Urology and Urogynaecology Masterclass at UCLH from Boston Scientific
  14. Allergan
  15. Axonics
  16. Laborie
  17. Ferring
  18. Pierre Fabre
  19. Vesica Urology
  20. Aspire Pharma
  21. annual National Service Optimisation Masterclasss in Botulinum Toxin from Allergan and Laborie
  22. EAU/AUA exchange program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Accurate diagnosis and categorization are crucial for managing urethral strictures. Adequate perioperative care and follow-up are essential for successful outcomes. The EAU guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for optimizing patient work-up and follow-up.
Context: Urethral stricture management guidelines are an important tool for guiding evidence-based clinical practice. Objective: To present a summary of the 2021 European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on diagnosis, classification, perioperative management, and follow-up of male urethral stricture disease. Evidence acquisition: The panel performed a literature review on the topics covering a time frame between 2008 and 2018, and using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria for the literature. Key papers beyond this time period could be included if panel consensus was reached. A strength rating for each recommendation was added based on a review of the available literature after panel discussion. Evidence synthesis: Routine diagnostic evaluation encompasses history, patient-reported outcome measures, examination, uroflowmetry, postvoid residual measurement, endoscopy, and urethrography. Ancillary techniques that provide a three-dimensional assessment and may demonstrate associated abnormalities include sonourethrography and magnetic resonance urethrogram, although these are not utilised routinely. The classification of strictures should include stricture location and calibre. Urethral rest after urethral manipulations is advised prior to offering urethroplasty. An assessment for urinary extravasation after urethroplasty is beneficial before catheter removal. The optimal time of catheterisation after urethrotomy is <72 h, but is unclear following urethroplasty and depends on various factors. Patients undergoing urethroplasty should be followed up for at least 1 yr. Objective and subjective outcomes should be assessed after urethral surgeries, including patient satisfaction and sexual function. Conclusions: Accurate diagnosis and categorisation is important in determining management. Adequate perioperative care and follow-up is essential for achieving successful outcomes. The EAU guidelines provide relevant evidence-based recommendations to optimise patient work-up and follow-up. Patient summary: Urethral strictures have to be assessed adequately before planning treatment. Before surgery, urethral rest and infection prevention are advised. After urethral surgery, x-ray dye tests are advised before removing catheters to ensure that healing has occurred. Routine follow-up is required, including patient-reported outcomes. These guidelines aim to guide doctors in the diagnosis, care, and follow-up of patients with urethral stricture. (C) 2021 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available