The Immediate Management of Pelvic Fracture Urethral Injury—Endoscopic Realignment or Cystostomy?

No AccessJournal of UrologyAdult Urology1 Oct 2017The Immediate Management of Pelvic Fracture Urethral Injury—Endoscopic Realignment or Cystostomy? Qingsong Zou, Shukui Zhou, Kaile Zhang, Ranxing Yang, and Qiang Fu Qingsong ZouQingsong Zou , Shukui ZhouShukui Zhou , Kaile ZhangKaile Zhang , Ranxing YangRanxing Yang , and Qiang FuQiang Fu View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.04.081AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Purpose: We determined whether endoscopic realignment or cystostomy would provide the best immediate management of pelvic fracture urethral injury. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 590 patients with pelvic fracture urethral injury. Of the patients 522 were included in analysis due to strict criteria, including 129 in the endoscopic realignment group and 393 in the cystostomy group. Data on stricture formation and length, intervention technique and long-term functional outcomes were analyzed. Results: In the endoscopic realignment group stricture developed in 111 patients (83%) at a mean of 23.5 months, which is longer than the 7.6 months reported in the cystostomy group (p <0.05). Mean stricture length was 3.2 cm in the realignment group and 3.7 cm in the cystostomy group (p <0.05). Internal urethrotomy was performed in 21 patients (19%) treated with realignment vs 18 (5%) treated with cystostomy (p <0.05). Further repair was accomplished via simple perineal anastomosis in 57 patients (51%) with realignment and 138 (35%) with cystostomy (p <0.05). Ancillary procedures such as corporeal splitting, inferior pubectomy and crural rerouting were necessary in 14 (13%), 14 (13%) and 5 patients (4%) in the endoscopic realignment group, and in 94 (24%), 100 (25%) and 43 (11%), respectively, in the cystostomy group (all p <0.05). The rates of impotence and incontinence did not statistically differ between the endoscopy and cystostomy groups (14.3% vs 16.2% and 1.6% vs 2.1%, respectively, p >0.05). Conclusions: Endoscopic realignment may reduce stricture formation and length, and facilitate urethroplasty. However, endoscopic realignment is also associated with a prolonged clinical course for recurrence. References 1 : The management of the acute setting of pelvic fracture urethral injury (realignment vs. suprapubic cystostomy alone). Arab J Urol2015; 13: 7. Google Scholar 2 : Pelvic fracture urethral injuries: the unresolved controversy. J Urol1999; 161: 1433. Link, Google Scholar 3 : SIU/ICUD Consultation on Urethral Strictures: pelvic fracture urethral injuries. Urology2014; 83: S48. Google Scholar 4 : The treatment of posterior urethral disruption associated with pelvic fractures: comparative experience of early realignment versus delayed urethroplasty. J Urol2005; 173: 873. Link, Google Scholar 5 : Primary endoscopic realignment of urethral disruption injuries–a double-edged sword?. J Urol2015; 194: 1022. Link, Google Scholar 6 : Early endoscopic primary realignment decreases stricture formation and reduces medical costs in traumatic complete posterior urethral disruption in a 2-year follow-up. Chang Gung Med J2011; 34: 179. Google Scholar 7 : Transperineal bulboprostatic anastomosis in patients with simple traumatic posterior urethral strictures: a retrospective study from a referral urethral center. Urology2009; 74: 1132. Google Scholar 8 : Effect of early realignment on length and delayed repair of postpelvic fracture urethral injury. Urology2012; 79: 912. Google Scholar 9 : Use of anastomotic urethroplasty with partial pubectomy for posterior urethral obliteration injuries: 10 years experience. World J Urol2009; 27: 695. Google Scholar 10 : Early endoscopic realignment of post-traumatic posterior urethral disruption. Urology2001; 57: 628. Google Scholar 11 : Endoscopic realignment for post-traumatic rupture of posterior urethra. Prog Urol2003; 13: 1345. Google Scholar 12 : Evaluation of immediate endoscopic realignment as a treatment modality for traumatic urethral injuries. J Trauma2008; 64: 1443. Google Scholar 13 : Early effectiveness of endoscopic posterior urethra primary alignment. J Trauma Acute Care Surg2013; 75: 189. Google Scholar 14 : Early endoscopic realignment as primary therapy for complete posterior urethral disruptions. J Endourol1998; 12: 283. Google Scholar 15 : Immediate management of posterior urethral disruptions due to pelvic fracture: therapeutic alternatives. J Urol1997; 157: 1444. Link, Google Scholar 16 : Cadaveric anatomy of pelvic fracture urethral distraction injury: most injuries are distal to the external urinary sphincter. J Urol2005; 173: 869. Link, Google Scholar 17 : Evaluation and management of traumatic posterior urethral disruption with flexible cystourethroscopy. J Trauma2001; 50: 36. Google Scholar 18 : Outcomes of endoscopic realignment of pelvic fracture associated urethral injuries at a level 1 trauma center. J Urol2012; 188: 174. Link, Google Scholar 19 : Pelvic fracture urethral injuries: evaluation of various methods of management. J Urol1996; 156: 1288. Link, Google Scholar 20 : Primary realignment vs suprapubic cystostomy for the management of pelvic fracture-associated urethral injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Urology2014; 83: 924. Google Scholar © 2017 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 198Issue 4October 2017Page: 869-874 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2017 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Keywordsurethral stricturecystostomypelvisfracturesendoscopyboneMetricsAuthor Information Qingsong Zou Equal study contribution. More articles by this author Shukui Zhou Equal study contribution. More articles by this author Kaile Zhang More articles by this author Ranxing Yang More articles by this author Qiang Fu More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...