Outcome Of Urethroplasty For Urethral Stricture At Jos Universitry Teaching Hospital.
The treatment of urethral stricture disease has remained a challenge over the years.The outcome has also been varied, with recurrent stricture being a major concern. We determined the outcome of urethroplastywith particular reference to the complications. Thiswas a retrospective study over 10 years(1995 to 2005) done at the JosUniversity Teaching Hospital, a tertiary health institution in themiddle belt region ofNigeria. There were a total of 32 patients whose ages ranged from0.06 to 75 years (mean 25yrs, SD18.8yrs,). Eleven patients had had one form of stricture treatment or the other. Stricture aetiology was traumatic in 21 (66%) and inflammatory in 6(19%) patients. Of the 24 patients in whom the stricture length at operation was specified, six, 11 and sevenwere <2cm, 2-4cmand >4cmrespectively. The stricturewas located in the anterior urethra in 18(58.1%), posterior urethra in 2(6.4%) and bulbomembranous in 11(35.5%) of patients (unspecified in one). The bulbar urethra was the singlemost involved region, occurring in 12(38.7%) patients. Resection and end to end anastomosis was done in 16 patients and replacement urethroplasty in 16 others (Quarteys in 12, Swinney in 3 and Orandi in 1). Complications observed were urinary tract infection in 12(37.5%) patients, recurrent stricture 11(34.4%) wound infection 10(31.3%), oedema of genitalia 7(21.9%), urethrocutaneous fistula 4(12.5%), impotence 3(9.4%), wound haematoma 2(6.3%) and urinary incontinence in 1(3.1%) patient(s). Urinary tract infection, recurrence of the stricture and wound infection remain our major challenges.We recommend that in order to improve outcome, surgeons should regularly audit their practice and make necessary adjustments. In addition, urethroplasty should preferably be carried out by those with the cognate experience,while not compromising the need to teach younger colleagues.
Keywords: urethroplasty, outcome, urethra, stricture
Nigerian Jouranl of Clinical Practice Vol. 11 (4) 2008: pp. 300-304