Mathieu repair of distal and midshaft hypospadias: risks and benefits of foreskin reconstruction versus circumcision.

Abstract

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare the risks and benefits of Mathieu repair of hypospadias with or without circumcision in consecutive operated cases.MethodsEighty-six children with midshaft or distal hypospadias were randomly divided into two groups and underwent circumcision (Group A) or preputial reconstruction (Group B) during hypospadias repair. Postoperative complications, outcomes, and parental satisfaction were assessed for circumcised and uncircumcised patients. All patients with midshaft or distal hypospadias with or without minimal chordee were included.ResultsNo statistically significant differences in urethral complications were found between the two groups. Meatal stenosis occurred in one case in Group A and one case in Group B. Fistulae occurred in five cases in Group A and six cases in Group B. Urethral dehiscence occurred in no case in either group. No case of phimosis was seen in Group B. After a mean follow-up of 6 months, all parents of Group A cases stated that they were satisfied with the circumcision for religious and/or social reasons, but no parents of Group B cases were satisfied with preputioplasty (P ≤ 0.05). No case of hypospadias repair failure was seen in our operated cases. Finally, no cases in Group B required redo hypospadias surgery.ConclusionMathieu repair with synchronous circumcision is feasible in all patients with distal or midshaft hypospadias with or without minimal chordee, and should be considered in accordance with surgeon preference. In the case of prepuce preservation, parents should be informed that there is a benefit of tissue banking for probable redo hypospadias repair but with an increased risk of complications and a need for another procedure, ie, circumcision.