Urethral Mobilization as an Alternative Procedure for Distal Hypospadias Repair

What are the factors affecting glanular dehiscence after hypospadias surgery?

BACKGROUND

Glanular dehiscence (GD) is one of the main complications after hypospadias surgery. There is a limited number of publications regarding GD in the literature.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this work is to reveal the factors that affect GD after a literature review.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature search for relevant articles was performed in database using the search term glans dehiscence without setting date range limit or any other limits. All articles related to GD after hypospadias surgery were included in this study. After collecting the information from full text articles, 71 articles were included in this systematic review. In these studies, localization of hypospadic meatus, type of surgery, and other clinical data which were thought to behave as risk factors for GD were obtained. Chi-Square test was used to evaluate the differences between the parameters, where p < 0.05 was taken as statistically significant.

RESULTS

After evaluating the 71 articles that met the inclusion criteria, 309 cases (3.48%) of GD after 8858 hypospadias repairs were obtained in this review. GD rates were found significantly high for proximal hypospadias (5%), two-stage hypospadia repairs (5%) and re-do hypospadias repair (8.75%) (p = 0.002, 0.022, and 0.004, respectively). Glans width <14 mm, urethral plate (UP) width <7 mm, hypospadias surgeries performed before 6 months of age and after puberty, and caudal block anesthesia increased the rate of GD.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of GD increases after proximal, cripple and staged hypospadias surgeries, a glans width <15 mm and UP width <8 mm, postpubertal surgeries, and caudal anesthesia use during surgery.

A different approach to distal hypospadias repair: The GUD (glandular urethral disassembly) technique

INTRODUCTION

Distal hypospadias represent the most frequent clinical presentation of hypospadias. In spite of more than 300 techniques available, there is not an ideal approach. We have proposed an alternative procedure based on the combination of minor urethral mobilization and major glans deconstruction and partial disassembly from the corpora, the GUD technique. We want to present our clinical experience with the procedure and describe it in detail.

METHODS

The technique consists of disconnecting the spongious tissue and the distal urethra from the corpora and detaching partially the glans as well, from 2 to 10 o'clock. The glans is opened in midline and the procedure combines cranially mobilization of urethra with caudal and medial rotation of glans wings to refurbish the glans correcting the hypospadia without urethroplasty.

RESULTS

We have treated 164 patients with distal hypospadia. Median age at the surgery was 22.4 months (1-184 months). The meatal position after penile degloving was coronal at 108 cases, subcoronal at 54 and 2 patients presented megameatus and intact foreskin. Three patients (1.8%) had mild penoscrotal transposition in addition to hypospadia. Twenty-eight patients were treated as a secondary repair (17%). We found complications in 6 patients (3.6%) consisting of five fistulas (3%) and three glans dehiscence (1.8%). Two patients had both complications. Follow up was 21 months (1-42 months) and the median follow-up time was 18 months.

DISCUSSION

We acknowledge that this procedure is intended only to distal hypospadias (coronal and subcoronal). We stress that the GUD procedure can be performed irrespectively of any urethral plate "quality" as it does not require a minimum glans width as the TIP repair. Moreover, there is no need for preoperative testosterone treatment. The absence of suture and urethroplasty minimizes the risk of coronal fistulas after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe that this procedure is a viable alternative to distal hypospadias repair.