Abstract:Introduction: Hypospadias is a syndrome of penile maldevelopment. The primary goal of hypospadias surgery is to create a penis with normal appearance and function. Historically, the outcome of hypospadias repair has been assessed based on the need for reoperation due to urethroplasty complications (UC), including fistula formation, dehiscence, meatal stenosis, or development of a urethral stricture. The Glans–Urethral Meatus–Shaft (GMS) score is a standardized tool to predict UC. Analysis of the cosmetic outcomes of hypospadias repair based on the appearance of the reconstructed penis has been validated, and standardized scores have been published. The Hypospadias Objective Penile Evaluation (HOPE) score is a validated questionnaire used to assess postoperative cosmetic outcomes. Although predictors of surgical outcomes and UC have been well documented, predictors of optimal cosmetic outcomes are lacking in the literature. Furthermore, reoperation due to cosmetic considerations has been poorly reported. Objective: To identify predictors of cosmetic outcomes after hypospadias repair and to assess the reoperation rate according to cosmetic considerations. Materials and Methods: This prospective cohort study included 126 boys who underwent primary hypospadias repair. The severity of hypospadias, degree of penile curvature, glans width, preoperative HOPE, and GMS scores were documented. The standard technique for single-stage repairs, the tubularized incised plate urethroplasty, was performed. The primary endpoint was cosmetic outcomes evaluated by the HOPE score questionnaire six months postoperatively. Optimal cosmetic results were defined by HOPE scores ≥ 57. Results: The study population consisted of the following cases: 87 (69%) subcoronal, 32 (25%) shaft, and 7 (6%) proximal hypospadias. Among the study participants, 102 boys (81%) had optimal cosmetic results (HOPE ≥ 57), and 24 boys (19%) had surgeries with suboptimal cosmetic outcomes (HOPE < 57). Ancillary procedures were performed in 21 boys (16%), of which 14 (11%) were solely for cosmetic considerations, and 7 were secondary to UC. Using the Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis of potential predictors of optimal cosmetic outcomes, the preoperative HOPE score had the highest area under the curve (AUC = 0.79; 95% CI 0.69–0.89, p < 0.001). After multivariable analysis, the degree of penile chordee (p = 0.013), glans width (p = 0.003), GMS score (p = 0.007), and preoperative HOPE score (p = 0.002) were significant predictors of cosmetic outcomes. Although meatal location predicted suboptimal cosmetic results in univariate analysis, it was not a factor in multivariable analysis. Conclusions: Over 80% of boys undergoing hypospadias repair achieved optimal cosmetic outcomes. More than 10% of cases underwent ancillary procedures, secondary solely to cosmetic considerations. Predictors of optimal cosmetic outcomes after hypospadias surgery included degree of chordee, glans width, and preoperative HOPE and GMS scores, which were the best predictors of satisfactory cosmetic results. Although meatal location is the main predictor of UC, it was not a predictor for cosmetic outcomes. Factors affecting cosmetic outcomes should be clearly explained to parents during the preoperative consultation.

Primary hypospadias repair outcomes: results from a retrospective cohort of 292 children

The Individual Therapy of Urethrocutaneous Fistula after Primary Urethroplasty for Hypospadias

Complications Following Primary Repair of Non-proximal Hypospadias in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Complication rates of proximal hypospadias: meta-analyses of four surgical repairs.

Comment to "identification of Risk Factors Associated with Numerous Reoperations Following Primary Hypospadias Repair"

The Application of Pedicled Tunica Vaginalis Flap Cover New Urethra in Redo and Second-Stage Hypospadias Repair

The long-term consequences of the hypospadias salvage repair issue

Time to complication after primary pediatric hypospadias repair with transverse preputial island flap urethroplasty

(268) Failed Hypospadias Repair In Adulthood - Transitional Urology

Hypospadias repair: a single centre experience

Use of Validated Questionnaires to Predict Cosmetic Outcomes of Hypospadias Repair

Cumulative re-operation rates during follow-up after hypospadias repair

Can paediatric surgical registrars safely perform supervised hypospadias surgery?

Re-do hypospadias surgery following failed previous repair: lessons learned over two decades of experience

Hypospadias surgery: when, what and by whom?

Predictors of surgical complications in boys with hypospadias: data from an internationa registry

Surgical Treatment of Hypospadias in Adults

Adult Hypospadias Outcomes for the Pediatric Urologist

[Long-term outcomes after hypospadias surgery: Sexual reported outcomes and quality of life in adulthood]

Scrotal Flaps for Skin Deficit Correction After Failed Hypospadias Repair

Editorial comment for "Surgical and functional outcomes of Dorsal Inlay Graft urethroplasty in revision vs primary hypospadias repair in the pediatric age,"