The management of patients with urethral stricture can be a complex process. However, with the appropriate tools, the urologist experienced in urethral surgery can manage most cases without too much difficulty. Here, we describe three surgical techniques--anastomotic urethroplasty, buccal mucosal graft-onlay urethroplasty and the two-staged Johanson urethroplasty--that, in our experience, can accommodate the majority of patients with urethral stricture and provide excellent long-term results. Diagnosis and evaluation of candidacy for each of the surgical techniques are important aspects of treatment planning, and are also described. The aim of the article is to increase the awareness of the technique and application of these three urethroplasty procedures, which can be implemented by all urologists who actively care for and surgically treat patients with urethral stricture disease.

Urethral strictures are difficult to manage. Some treatment modalities for urethral strictures are fraught with high patient morbidity and stricture recurrence rates; however, an extremely useful tool in the armamentarium of the Reconstructive Urologist is buccal mucosal urethroplasty. We like buccal mucosa grafts because of its excellent short and long-term results, low post-operative complication rate, and relative ease of use. We utilize it for most our bulbar urethral stricture repairs and some pendulous urethral stricture repairs, usually in conjunction with a first-stage Johanson repair. In this report, we discuss multiple surgical techniques for repair of urethral stricture disease. Diagnosis, evaluation of candidacy, surgical techniques, post-operative care, and complications are included. The goal is to raise awareness of buccal mucosa grafting for the management urethral stricture disease.

Objectives. To review the literature regarding ileovesicostomy and evaluate our patient population for clinical characteristics. Methods. Various surgical reconstructive techniques allow management of difficult clinical scenarios involving patients with neurogenic bladder, irretraceable lower urinary tract symptoms, lower urinary tract disaster, and urethrocutaneous fistulae. One such reconstructive technique employed is the ileovesicostomy. This procedure provides patients with a low-pressure urinary conduit utilizing the ileum and native bladder that empties without catheterization. We describe our patient population who underwent ileovesicostomy for 5 consecutive years ending 2007 at Detroit Receiving Hospital. Results. Most common diagnosis was neurogenic bladder secondary to spinal cord injury. Our population and clinical outcomes are similar to those previously reported in the literature. Conclusions. Based on our experience, we suggest that patients with severe lower urinary tract symptoms and who are unable to perform clean intermittent catheterization and/or refractory to medical therapy ileovesicostomy should be the procedure of choice.

A 56-year-old man was referred to a reconstructive urologist for evaluation of a tender nodule in the penoscrotal area. Penile Doppler ultrasound showed a non-compressible mass with internal vascularity within the corpora spongiosum, and MRI identified an enhancing, solid mass arising from the ventral aspect of the urethra. Surgical resection warranted partial excision and reconstruction of the urethra, which was achieved by a dorsal onlay buccal mucosal graft urethroplasty through a perineal incision with penile invagination. The histopathology report concluded to an invasive, high-grade urothelial carcinoma, for which an aggressive oncological approach was considered. However, discussion with the pathology team led to the identification of a glomus tumour for which the patient did not need additional procedures. Urethral glomus tumours are extremely rare and should be included in the differential diagnosis of urethral masses. This case exemplifies the importance of teamwork in the management of uncommon cases.

Introduction Penile prosthesis patients with mechanical failure who wish continued treatment require device removal and replacement. Infection rates as high as 18% have been reported for procedures involving replacement of malfunctioning penile prosthesis compared with 2% for primary implantation. Aim The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of patients who have had a penile prosthesis replacement for mechanical failure to determine if those who had a mini-salvage washout procedure had better outcomes than those who did not. Methods A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients undergoing inflatable penile prosthesis replacement for mechanical failure from 1997 to 2010. Demographics, past medical history, reason for device failure, type of device, time from original implantation to failure, operative details, culture results, and follow-up data were analyzed. Main Outcome Measures Infection rates for penile implant revisions with and without mini-salvage washout. Results Forty-two patients underwent a mini-salvage procedure for mechanical failure and 87 patients underwent standard sterile replacement. There were no infections in the mini-salvage group and two (2.3%) in the standard sterile group (P = 1.00). In patients with culture data available, two patients in each group had coagulase negative staphylococcus on culture, but none of these patients developed an infection. One patient who developed an infection had an intraoperative culture, which revealed no growth. The other patient with an infection did not undergo intraoperative culture testing. Operating room (OR) time was longer with the mini-salvage procedure (156 ± 36 minutes vs. 131 ± 31 minutes, P < 0.001). Conclusions Performing a mini-salvage procedure for patients undergoing penile prosthesis replacement for mechanical failure adds to operative time but did not significantly change the infection rate and may not be indicated. Furthermore, intraoperative culture results were not predictive of postoperative infection.

No abstract

In patients having emergency abdominal surgery for trauma, the presence of urologic injury tends to increase mortality and morbidity. Methods This retrospective study evaluated patients requiring emergency surgery for abdominal trauma at a Level 1 Trauma Center over 30 years (1980-2010). Special attention was given to patients with concomitant genitourinary (GU) injuries. Results Of 1105 patients requiring an emergency laparotomy for trauma, 242 (22%) had urologic injuries including kidney 178 (16%), ureter 47 (4%), and bladder 46 (4%). Of the 242 patients, 50 (20%) died early (<48 hours) and 13 (5%) died later, primarily due to infection. A concept of "seven deadly signs" of hypoperfusion was developed. In patients with GU injuries, the presence of any deadly sign of hypoperfusion increased the mortality rate from 4% (6/152) to 63% (56/90), p<0.001. Of the 53 patients having a nephrectomy, 36 (68%) had one or more deadly signs and 27 (75%) died. Of 17 without deadly signs, only 2 (12%) died (p=0.001). Of 167 GU patients receiving blood, 59 (35%) developed infection vs 3/75(4%) in those receiving no blood (p<0.001). Conclusions The presence of deadly signs of severe injury and hypoperfusion on admission was the major factor determining mortality. With a severely injured kidney plus any deadly signs of hypoperfusion, special efforts should be made to avoid a nephrectomy.

No abstract