1
|
Chang C, Nikolavsky D, Ong M, Simhan J. Pain management strategies in urethral reconstruction: a narrative review. Transl Androl Urol 2022; 11:1442-1451. [PMID: 36386256 PMCID: PMC9641060 DOI: 10.21037/tau-22-363] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2022] [Accepted: 08/31/2022] [Indexed: 08/06/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Few investigations explore pain recovery comprehensively following urethral reconstruction, and understanding pain pathways that lead to discomfort following reconstruction has posed challenges. Options for pain control aside from opioids continue to be in the early forms of investigation, and remain an important strategy to combat the well-documented burden of the opioid epidemic. We conduct a detailed assessment of pain pathways in patients undergoing urethral reconstruction and further outline non-narcotic based pain management strategies in those undergoing urethroplasty. METHODS We performed a literature review to describe pain pathways involved in urethral reconstruction with buccal graft, and postoperative pain recovery. We searched for pain management techniques performed by fields similar to urology, and those being utilized in urethroplasty with buccal graft. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS Innervation of the penoscrotal areas and mouth are well-defined, but understanding postoperative pain after urethroplasty remains a challenge. Preventative analgesia, nerve blocks, and multimodal analgesia have been employed by colorectal and gynecological surgeons. Urologists have utilized similar techniques for patients undergoing urethral reconstruction with buccal graft. CONCLUSIONS Few investigations explore pain recovery comprehensively following urethral reconstruction, but we believe that utilizing a combination of preventative analgesia, nerve blocks, and multimodal analgesia will have acceptable outcomes in post-surgical patients undergoing recovery. Additional work is required to further explore how combined pain management strategies can optimally reduce postoperative pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chrystal Chang
- Division of Urologic Oncology and Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Dmitriy Nikolavsky
- Department of Urology, State University of New York Upstate Medical Center, Syracuse, NY, USA
| | - Melody Ong
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA
| | - Jay Simhan
- Division of Urologic Oncology and Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Joshi PM, Bandini M, Bafna S, Sharma V, Patil A, Bhadranavar S, Yepes C, Barbagli G, Montorsi F, Kulkarni SB. Graft Plus Fasciocutaneous Penile Flap for Nearly or Completely Obliterated Long Bulbar and Penobulbar Strictures. EUR UROL SUPPL 2021; 35:21-28. [PMID: 34877550 PMCID: PMC8633879 DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2021.10.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 10/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Graft plus flap urethroplasty is gaining momentum in patients with nearly or completely obliterated urethral strictures, in whom staged procedures or perineal urethrostomy is the only possible alternative. However, graft plus flap urethroplasty is mainly adopted for strictures involving the penile urethra. Objective To report our experience on graft plus flap urethroplasty for bulbar and penobulbar reconstruction. Design, setting, and participants Between January 2014 and June 2020, patients with nearly or completely obliterated long (>4 cm) bulbar or penobulbar strictures, who required graft plus flap urethroplasty, were considered for this study. Surgical procedure The bulbar and the penile urethra were accessed through a perineal incision and penile invagination when required. Grafts were harvested from cheek, lingual, or preputial skin and quilted over the corpora to reconstruct the dorsal plate of the neourethra. The fasciocutaneous penile flap recreated the ventral plate of the neourethra. The corpus spongiosum was flapped over the neourethra to prevent the formation of diverticula. Measurements Any need for instrumentation after surgery was defined as the primary failure. Obstructive symptoms or maximum flow rate (Qmax) below 10 ml/s, with or without a need for instrumentation, was defined as a secondary failure. Results and limitations We identified 15 patients who met the inclusion criteria. The median stricture length was 7 cm (interquartile range [IQR] 5–8 cm). The inner cheek was the preferred site for graft harvesting (53.3%). No perioperative complication of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III were recorded in the first 30 postoperative days. The median Qmax at catheter removal was 23 ml/min (IQR 21.5–26 ml/min). The median follow-up was 25 mo (IQR 10–30 mo). The primary success rate was 86.7% (13/15) and the secondary success rate was 73.3% (11/15). Post-traumatic strictures represent a contraindication for this technique. Conclusions In referral centers, graft plus flap urethroplasty represents a feasible option for patients with nearly or completely obliterated long (>4 cm) strictures. Our study demonstrated that this option is also feasible for strictures involving mainly the bulbar urethra. Patient summary Perineal urethrostomy should be considered as the last option in patients with a nearly or completely obliterated bulbar urethral stricture. Nowadays, graft plus fasciocutaneous penile flap augmentation enriched our armamentarium of bulbar urethra reconstruction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Marco Bandini
- Kulkarni Reconstructive Urology Center, Pune, India.,Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute (URI), San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.,Centro Chirurgico Toscano, Arezzo, Italy
| | | | - Vipin Sharma
- Kulkarni Reconstructive Urology Center, Pune, India
| | - Amey Patil
- Kulkarni Reconstructive Urology Center, Pune, India
| | | | | | | | - Francesco Montorsi
- Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute (URI), San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Bandini M, Barbagli G, Leni R, Cirulli GO, Basile G, Balò S, Montorsi F, Sansalone S, Salonia A, Briganti A, Butnaru D, Lazzeri M. Assessing in-hospital morbidity after urethroplasty using the European Association of Urology Quality Criteria for standardized reporting. World J Urol 2021; 39:3921-3930. [PMID: 33855598 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-021-03692-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2021] [Accepted: 03/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE To conduct a rigorous assessment of in-hospital morbidity after urethroplasty according with the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines for complication reporting. METHODS We retrospectively (2015-2019) identified 469 consecutive patients receiving urethroplasty (e.g. bulbar urethroplasty with grafts, penile urethroplasty with/without grafts/flaps, Johanson, de novo or revision perineostomy, end-to-end anastomosis, meatoplasty and/or meatotomy) at our tertiary care institution. Complications were graded with Clavien-Dindo score and Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI). Complications were classified in: bleeding no gastrointestinal, cardiac, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, infectious, neurological, oral, wound, miscellaneous, and pulmonary. Logistic regression tested for predictors of in-hospital complications and prolonged hospitalization (> 75th percentile). Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression investigated the effect of complications on failure after urethroplasty. RESULTS Overall, 161 (34.3%) patients experienced at least one complication. Of those, 47 (10%) experienced two or more complications and 59 (12.6%) experienced at least one Clavien-Dindo ≥ II complication. Only two patients had Clavien-Dindo III complications. Infectious was the most frequent complication, and de novo or revision perineostomy was associated with the highest rate of complications. The occurrence of any complications, as well as complication with Clavien-Dindo ≥ II were associated with prolonged hospitalizations, but not with higher rates of post-urethroplasty failure. CONCLUSIONS Complications after urethroplasty were common events, but rarely with severe sequelae. Infectious were the most common complications and perineostomy was the type of urethroplasty with the highest rate of complications. The application of the EAU recommendations allowed the identifications of a higher number of complications after urethroplasty if compared with previous reports based on unsupervised chart review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marco Bandini
- Center for Reconstructive Urethra Surgery, Arezzo, Rome, Milan, Italy. .,Centro Chirurgico Toscano, Arezzo, Italy. .,Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute (URI), San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy.
| | - Guido Barbagli
- Center for Reconstructive Urethra Surgery, Arezzo, Rome, Milan, Italy.,Centro Chirurgico Toscano, Arezzo, Italy
| | - Riccardo Leni
- Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute (URI), San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Giuseppe O Cirulli
- Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute (URI), San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Giuseppe Basile
- Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute (URI), San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Sofia Balò
- Centro Chirurgico Toscano, Arezzo, Italy
| | - Francesco Montorsi
- Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute (URI), San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Andrea Salonia
- Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute (URI), San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Alberto Briganti
- Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute (URI), San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Denis Butnaru
- Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
| | - Massimo Lazzeri
- Department of Urology, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, IRCCS, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|