Risk factors of penile resurfacing in re-operative hypospadias repair: A retrospective analytical study.
Fistula
Hypospadias
Penis
Re-Operative
Risk factors
Surgical flaps
Journal
Journal of pediatric urology
ISSN: 1873-4898
Titre abrégé: J Pediatr Urol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101233150
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2022
06 2022
Historique:
received:
02
10
2021
revised:
04
02
2022
accepted:
06
04
2022
pubmed:
28
4
2022
medline:
29
6
2022
entrez:
27
4
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In re-operative hypospadias repair, scarred urethral plate, and deficient unhealthy penile skin are usually problematic. Difficulties are not only in urethroplasty but also in penile skin coverage. Penile skin coverage after urethroplasty with good viable skin decreases the complication rate and increases the satisfaction with repair. Studies reporting variables that increase the risks of the need for penile resurfacing in re-operative hypospadias are lacking. To determine the risk factors of the need for penile resurfacing techniques (PRSTs) in re-operative hypospadias. A retrospective analysis of the redo hypospadias cases operated in-between January 2010 and December 2020 was done. Surgical data of the previous repairs, the indications for intervention, and the penile shaft coverage techniques at the time of the last repair were collected and analyzed. Patients' records were reviewed and categorized into two main groups. Group one include patients with simple skin closure, and group two include patients in whom penile resurfacing was done. Univariate analysis and Stepwise logistic regression measured the risk factors of the need for penile resurfacing techniques. Out of 223 re-operative hypospadias, simple skin closure was done in 105 (group 1). Penile skin resurfacing (Byars flaps, Heineke-Mikulicz technique, and Z-Plasty) was in 55 (group 2a). In 63 patients (group 2b), scrotal flaps and skin grafts (split and full thickness) were the PRSTs. Patients ages, proximal hypospadias, number of prior surgery, one-stage repair, penile skin use in repair especially flap techniques, more than one complication in the same case, and unsatisfactory skin appearance increased the risk for PRSTs. Each previous repair increases the odds ratio of penile and non-penile resurfacing 1.9 and 3.2 folds respectively. One-stage repair increases odds of PRSTs 4 folds. We analyzed the risk factors of the need for penile resurfacing techniques in the re-operative hypospadias cases. Step-wise logistic regression showed that the number of previous repairs and one-stage repair are the independent risk factors of penile resurfacing. Also, it showed that the number of prior surgeries is the only independent risk factor for non-penile skin resurfacing. Number of previous repair is the independent risk factors of penile resurfacing and non-penile skin use in resurfacing. Previous repair in one-stage is an independent risk factor of the need for penile resurfacing.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35474166
pii: S1477-5131(22)00140-1
doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2022.04.001
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
366.e1-366.e9Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Journal of Pediatric Urology Company. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of interest The authors have no competing interests to declare.