Abstract
ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of the buccal mucosa and lingual mucosa used in children who received multiple failed hypospadias surgeries.MethodWe conducted a retrospective study of 62 children who received buccal or lingual mucosa graft urethroplasty in our hospital between 2012 and 2015. The ages ranged from 3.5–11 y. All cases included multiple failed hypospadias procedures, and the subjects received previous operations 2–3 times. All patients underwent one-stage operations. Thirty-three cases were treated with lingual mucosa grafts. The patient ages ranged from 3.5 to 11 y (median 7.5 y), and they had previous operations 2–3 times (mean 2.8±0.7). Grafts ranged from lengths of 2–6 cm (mean 5.1±0.46 cm) and widths of 0.5–1.5 cm (mean 1.2± 0.16 cm). Our follow-up was 5 to 12 m (mean 8.3±1.2 m). Twenty-nine cases were treated with buccal mucosa grafts. The patient ages ranged from 4 to 9.2 y (median 7.0 y), and they had previous operations 2–3 times (mean 2.5±0.2). Grafts ranged from lengths of 2–5.3 cm (mean 4.9± 0.28 cm) and widths of 0.5–1.5 cm (mean 1.0±0.11 cm). Our follow-up was 5 to 12 m (mean 7.9±0.5 m). The results were tested with SPSS 18.0. The rates of complications were compared by a chi-square test, and pre-operative conditions were compared by t test.ResultsFor the outcomes of the two groups, there was no significant difference between the groups in terms of age, preoperative surgery time, and the length and width of the grafts (p>0.05). For the lingual mucosa graft group, fistula: 2/33 (6.0%), stricture: 1/33(3.0%), ventral curvature: 2/33(6.0%), complications: 5/33(15.0%), success rate: 28/33(84.8%), Hose score: 14.34±0.95, peak flow: 6.5 ml/s-12.0 ml/s, and mean peak flow: 9.3±0.4 ml/s. For the buccal mucosa graft group, fistula: 2/29(6.8%), stricture: 2/29(6.8%), ventral curvature: 1/29 (3.4%), complication rate: 5/29(17.0%), success rate: 24/29 (83.0%), Hose score: 14.28±1.03, peak flow: 6.5 ml/s-12.0 ml/s, and mean peak flow: 9.2±0.2 ml/s. There were no differences between the two groups for overall success, complication rates, peak flow, and the Hose scores(P>0.05).ConclusionThe lingual mucosal graft and the buccal mucosa graft both achieved good outcomes, and the lingual mucosa graft made up for the shortcomings of the buccal mucosa graft, which provided a reliable way to treat the multiple failed hypospadias surgeries in pre-pubertal boys.
Highlights
The incidence of hypospadias is approximately 1/300, which has rapidly grown in recent years
Lingual mucosa and buccal mucosa grafts used in inlay urethroplasty
If buccal mucosa grafts are confronted with scarred tissues, Buccal mucosa graft urethroplasty (BMG) urethroplasty cannot be chosen again
Summary
The incidence of hypospadias is approximately 1/300, which has rapidly grown in recent years. Based on the literature from Pubmed, a wide variety of grafts have been used for urethral reconstruction after failed hypospadias procedures [4]. Since Humby first reported using the buccal mucosa graft in 1941, the BMG has been widely accepted and has achieved satisfactory outcomes for patients who have had multiple failed hypospadias procedures[5, 6]. Patients who experienced failed hypospadias procedures often had long urethral defects and buccal mucosa grafts were not possible due to lack of available tissue. Simonato et al were the first to report using tongue mucosa as an alternative donor site for urethroplasty in 2006, and their group had achieved good outcomes. Few reports have sought to compare outcomes of the BMG and LMG used in inlay graft urethroplasty in pre-pubertal Chinese boys. The aim of our study was to compare the two graft types and confirm the reliability of LMG in pre-pubertal boys from a Chinese population
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
