Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyTrauma/Reconstruction: Urethral Reconstruction (including Stricture) III1 Apr 2015PD22-12 A RANDOMIZED TRIAL ON PERIOPERATIVE PAIN AND MORBIDITY: NON-CLOSURE VERSUS CLOSURE OF THE BUCCAL MUCOSA HARVEST SITE DURING URETHROPLASTY Armin Soave, Roland Dahlem, Jessica Langetepe, Phillip Reiss, Matthias Müller, Katharina Kuhlencord, Malte Vetterlein, Marie Kuhl, Clemens Rosenbaum, Phillip Marks, Michael Rink, Oliver Engel, Silke Riechardt, Margit Fisch, and Sascha Ahyai Armin SoaveArmin Soave More articles by this author , Roland DahlemRoland Dahlem More articles by this author , Jessica LangetepeJessica Langetepe More articles by this author , Phillip ReissPhillip Reiss More articles by this author , Matthias MüllerMatthias Müller More articles by this author , Katharina KuhlencordKatharina Kuhlencord More articles by this author , Malte VetterleinMalte Vetterlein More articles by this author , Marie KuhlMarie Kuhl More articles by this author , Clemens RosenbaumClemens Rosenbaum More articles by this author , Phillip MarksPhillip Marks More articles by this author , Michael RinkMichael Rink More articles by this author , Oliver EngelOliver Engel More articles by this author , Silke RiechardtSilke Riechardt More articles by this author , Margit FischMargit Fisch More articles by this author , and Sascha AhyaiSascha Ahyai More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.1454AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Buccal mucosa (BM) graft urethroplasty is the standard surgical treatment for long urethral strictures. However, donor site complications can cause significant perioperative pain and morbidity, and there is conflicting data regarding the morbidity of BM harvest site closure (C) versus non-closure (NC). Therefore, the aim of our study was to analyze the impact of NC versus C of the BM harvest site on perioperative pain and morbidity in patients undergoing BM urethroplasty in a randomized trial. METHODS In total, 50 consecutive patients undergoing BM urethroplasty were randomized into two groups. In group 1, the BM harvest site at the inner cheek was not closed, whereas in group 2 it was closed with interrupted 4-0 monofil sutures. Pain was assessed at baseline and on postoperative day (POD) 1, 5 and 21 using the numeric rating scale (NRS) and Mc Gill Pain Questionnaire Short Form (MGQSF). In addition, impairment of taste perception, salivation, mouth opening, smiling, oral sensation, diet and speech was assessed at baseline and on POD 1, 5 and 21. RESULTS Due to missing data, 5 patients were excluded, resulting in 45 patients for analyses (24 NC (group 1), 21 C (group 2)). Mean age of patients was 48 years (range: 20-79). Mean length of the BM graft was 48 mm (range: 20-100). Mean score on NRS was 2.9, 2.4 and 0.8 on POD 1, 5 and 21, respectively. A significant difference between the groups was found exclusively at POD 21 with C having higher NRS scores (C vs. NC: 1.3 vs. 0.4; p=0.01). In addition, at POD 21 patients in the C group had more frequently a slurred speech, compared to the NC group (p=0.02). The MGQSF did not show significant differences between both groups at baseline and POD 1, 5 and 21. Between both groups, there were also no differences regarding taste perception, salivation, mouth opening, smiling, oral sensation and diet at baseline and postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS There seems to be an advantage for NC of the BM harvest site in the perioperative setting. However, more patients and a longer follow-up is warranted. © 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 193Issue 4SApril 2015Page: e480 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Armin Soave More articles by this author Roland Dahlem More articles by this author Jessica Langetepe More articles by this author Phillip Reiss More articles by this author Matthias Müller More articles by this author Katharina Kuhlencord More articles by this author Malte Vetterlein More articles by this author Marie Kuhl More articles by this author Clemens Rosenbaum More articles by this author Phillip Marks More articles by this author Michael Rink More articles by this author Oliver Engel More articles by this author Silke Riechardt More articles by this author Margit Fisch More articles by this author Sascha Ahyai More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.