Efficacy of urethroplasty plus correcting penoscrotal transposition for proximal hypospadias during a second stage repair

陈艳,黄轶晨,谢华,吕逸清,吴旻,陈方
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn421158-20220424-00287
2022-01-01
Abstract:Objective:To explore the efficacy of urethroplasty plus correcting penoscrotal transposition for proximal hypospadias during a second stage repair.Methods:From October 2018 to December 2021, 56 cases of proximal hypospadias plus penoscrotal transposition underwent Byar's staged operation. They were divided into two groups according to surgical approaches. In group A (n=30), urethroplasty (Duplay) and penoscrotal transposition correction (modified Glenn-Anderson) were performed as a second stage repair. While in group B (n=26), urethroplasty (Duplay) alone. The scores of hypospadias objective scoring evaluation (HOSE) and pediatric penile perception score (PPPS) were assessed for parental perception of urinary symptoms and cosmetic outcomes.Results:The median HOSE and PPPS scores were 16.00 (15.00, 16.00) and 13.00 (12.00, 13.00) in group A versus 14.00 (14.00, 15.25) and 12.00 (10.25, 12.00) in group B. The inter-group difference of scores were statistically significant ( P<0.001, P=0.003). The incidence of urinary fistula was 6.7%(2/30) in group A versus 19.2%(5/26) in group B ( P=0.231). The inter-group difference had no statistical significance. In group A, no urinary fistula occurred in penoscrotal area and penile scrotal transposition was corrected satisfactorily. In group B, urinary fistulas (n=3) occurred in penoscrotal area. Conclusion:During a second stage repair for proximal hypospadias, correcting penoscrotal transposition plus urethroplasty is both safe and feasible without higher surgical complications. It may lower the incidence of urethral fistula in penoscrotal area.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?