Abstract
Purpose:
We evaluated the outcome of postpubertal patients who underwent 1-stage hypospadias repair before onset of puberty with at least 10 years of followup.
Materials and Methods:
A total of 2,053 patients underwent surgical repair of hypospadias between January 1981 and May 2004 at our hospital. We evaluated patients who are now at least 18 years old and who underwent 1-stage hypospadias repair. Data were collected in regard to familial incidence, age at operation, operative technique, complications and followup of at least 10 years. Evaluation was subdivided based on operative procedure.
Results:
A total of 126 patients were included in the study. The familial incidence was 7.9% of cases and an associated undescended testis was seen in 9.5%. There were 62 cases with no complications. At least 1 complication was seen in 64 cases, including infection in 3, tissue necrosis in the operative area in 3, wound dehiscence in 6, fistula in 29, meatal stenosis in 15, urethral stenosis in 10, cosmetic dissatisfaction in 16 and other in 2.
Conclusions:
Even in the hands of the experienced pediatric urologists the complication rate after hypospadias repair remains high, with an average of 54% at long-term followup. Our results clearly showed that additional complications can present after long-term followup (a first complication can present after more than 5 years with the longest interval being 14 years). Therefore, final outcome of hypospadias surgery can only be evaluated once the patient has reached adulthood. The results seem to depend on the severity of the abnormality, reflected in the complication distribution rather than operative technique.
References
- 1 :
Hypospadias . In: Campbell’s Urology. Edited by . Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Co.2002. chapt. 65. Google Scholar - 2 : Urethral reconstructions. Urol Clin North Am2002; 29: 485. Google Scholar
- 3 : Hypospadias. Curr Opin Urol1995; 5: 133. Google Scholar
- 4 : Short- and mid-term outcome of different types of one-stage hypospadias corrections. Eur Urol1997; 32: 475. Google Scholar
- 5 : One-stage hypospadias repair: experience with 544 cases. Eur Urol1999; 36: 436. Google Scholar
- 6 : One-stage repair of hypospadias: experience with 856 cases. Eur Urol1998; 34: 365. Google Scholar
- 7 : Factors affecting outcome of one stage anterior hypospadias repair: analysis of 422 cases. Pediatr Surg Int2002; 18: 142. Google Scholar
- 8 : Long-term follow-up of hypospadias repair. Br J Plast Surg2000; 53: 588. Google Scholar
- 9 : Matthieu hypospadias repair: experience in 202 patients. J Urol1999; 162: 2141. Link, Google Scholar
- 10 : Outcomes of one-stage technique for proximal hypospadias repair. Urology2001; 58: 267. Google Scholar
- 11 : Hypospadias repair by skin flaps: a comparison of onlay preputial island flaps with either Mathieu’s meatal based or Duckett’s tubularized preputial flaps. BJU Int1999; 83: 1032. Google Scholar
- 12 : Management of severe hypospadias using Glassberg’s modification of the Dukett repair. BJU Int2002; 89: 101. Google Scholar
- 13 : Complications of the preputial island flap-tube urethroplasty. BJU Int1999; 84: 89. Google Scholar
- 14 : Sexual behavior and sexual function of adults after hypospadias surgery: a comparative study. Urology2004; 171: 1876. Abstract, Google Scholar
- 15 : Penile length in the flaccid and erect states: guidelines for penile augmentation. J Urol1996; 156: 995. Link, Google Scholar
- 16 : The island flap technique for hypospadias repair. J Urol2002; 167: 2148. Link, Google Scholar
- 17 : MAGPI: a procedure for subcoronal hypospadias. J Urol2002; 167: 2153. Link, Google Scholar
- 18 : Management of urethrocutaneous fistula after hypospadias repair: 10 years’ experience. BJU Int2001; 88: 590. Google Scholar
- 19 : Variables in successful repair of urethrocutaneous fistula after hypospadias surgery. J Urol2002; 168: 726. Link, Google Scholar
- 20 : Urethrocutaneous fistula repair after hypospadias surgery. BJU Int2003; 92: 621. Google Scholar
- 21 : Management of recurrent urethral fistulas after hypospadias repair. Urology2003; 61: 448. Google Scholar
From the Pediatric Urology Centre, Department of Urology, University Medical Centre Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
