Treatment of Urethral Strictures in Transmasculine Patients

Background: Urethral strictures are a common complication after genital gender-affirming surgery (GGAS) in transmasculine patients. Studies that specifically focus on the management of urethral strictures are scarce. The aim of this systematic review is to collect all available evidence on the management of urethral strictures in transmasculine patients who underwent urethral lengthening. Methods: We performed a systematic review of the management of urethral strictures in transmasculine patients after phalloplasty or metoidioplasty (PROSPERO, CRD42021215811) with literature from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis-(PRISMA) guidelines were followed, and risk of bias was assessed for every individual study using the 5-criterion quality appraisal checklist. Results: Eight case series were included with a total of 179 transmasculine patients. Only one study discussed the management of urethral strictures after metoidioplasty. Urethral strictures were most often seen at the anastomosis between the fixed and pendulous urethra. For each stricture location, different techniques have been reported. All studies were at a high risk of bias. The current evidence is insufficient to favor one technique over another. Conclusions: Different techniques have been described for the different clinical scenarios of urethral stricture disease after GGAS. In the absence of comparative studies, however, it is impossible to advocate for one technique over another. This calls for additional research, ideally well-designed prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs), focusing on both surgical and functional outcome parameters.

Automated summary

Studies on the management of urethral strictures in transmasculine patients after genital gender-affirming surgery are scarce. Different techniques have been reported for different locations of urethral strictures, but there is insufficient evidence to favor one technique over another due to a lack of comparative studies. Additional research, ideally well-designed prospective randomized controlled trials, is needed to determine the most effective management techniques.