4.4 Article

Anterior Urethra Reconstruction With Lateral Lingual Mucosa Harvesting Technique

Journal

UROLOGY
Volume 90, Issue -, Pages 208-212

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2016.01.008

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Fund of China [81270780, 81470917]
  2. Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality [14JC1492100]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE To describe a new technique for harvesting the long lingual mucosal graft (LMG) to repair the long-segment urethral strictures. METHODS We performed a retrospective observational study of patients from whom LMGs were harvested from the lateral lining of the tongue for the long-segment anterior urethral strictures repair from 2012 to 2014 at the Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital. Patients who had 12 months minimum follow-up were included. Patients with incomplete clinical records were excluded. The LMG was applied on the urethra according to the dorsal onlay technique. RESULTS The primary outcome of the study was the postoperative failure-free survival rate. The secondary outcome was the rate of early and late complications at the harvesting site. Success was defined as Qmax >12 ml/s and no postoperative procedures. One hundred and one patients were included. Median stricture length was 7.1 +/- 3.6 cm; median LMG length was 7.2 +/- 3.6 cm. The success rate was 81.2% with a median follow-up of 23 months. Complications at the donor site had occurred in 41 patients at 6-months follow-up, and persisted in 18 patients at the 12-months follow-up. A bilateral harvest and harvest length were the main factors influencing complication rate (P = .0038 for 6 months and P = .1112 for 12 months). Almost half of donor site complications subsided within 12 months (P = .0018). CONCLUSION In patients requiring long oral grafts >7 cm to repair anterior strictures, a valid option is to harvest the graft from the lateral lining of the tongue. (C) 2016 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