Male urethral stricture disease: why management guidelines are challenging in low-income countries.

Abstract

Urethral stricture disease (USD) is one of the commonest urological pathologies in adult men in low- or low-middle-income countries, providing a significant work burden for the small number of specialist surgeons who are able to provide appropriate treatment. The underlying causes of anterior urethral stricture relate to urethral fibrosis from sexually transmitted infection, with posterior urethral disruption secondary to pelvic trauma being an equally common cause of USD in many countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Anterior urethral strictures are often long, and multifocal, and bulbo-prostatic disruptions are usually due to relatively low-velocity pelvic trauma. The management options available in resource-poor settings are often severely limited by the individual's ability to pay for care, the availability of a specialist surgeon and, importantly, a shortage of functioning endoscopic equipment for less-invasive treatments. Consequently, reconstructive surgery is often regarded by the patient, and surgeon, as the most cost-effective and, therefore, primary means of treating a urethral stricture once urethral dilatation has failed. Regional anaesthetic techniques have limited the adoption of free-graft augmentation as an alternative to pedicled flaps of locally available skin for reconstruction, whilst an inability to provide tension-free bulbo-prostatic anastomoses has negatively impacted the outcome from the treatment of pelvic fracture disruption injuries in much of sub-Saharan Africa. However, Urolink has found that local surgeons can be taught sustainable skills required for successful complex urethroplasty when supported by longitudinal mentorship in the management of difficult clinical issues. Evidence-based practice is known to improve the standard of care in specific conditions in high-income countries, including the management of male USD. However, guidelines developed in high-income countries are not necessarily appropriate for stricture management in less well-resourced healthcare environments but could be adapted to help improve the delivery of stricture care for men in low- or low-middle income countries.