Is There a Difference between Intralesional Treatments Combined with Internal Urethrotomy?

IF 0.6 4区 医学 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Nihat Türkmen, Kerem Bursalı
{"title":"Is There a Difference between Intralesional Treatments Combined with Internal Urethrotomy?","authors":"Nihat Türkmen, Kerem Bursalı","doi":"10.56434/j.arch.esp.urol.20247709.139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to compare the efficacy of various injection therapy agents used in combination with internal urethrotomy in preventing fibrosis and stricture recurrence.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Patients who underwent direct vision internal urethrotomy (DVIU) in our clinic between 2017 and 2022 were retrospectively screened. The patients were divided into four groups: DVIU + intralesional platelet-rich plasma (DVIU + PRP group, n = 21), DVIU + intralesional mitomycin-C (DVIU + MMC group, n = 21), DVIU + intralesional prednisolone (DVIU + prednisolone group, n = 21), and DVIU alone (control group, n = 21). The length (mm) and diameter (mm) of the recurrent urethral strictures and maximum urinary flow rate (Q<sub>max</sub>) on uroflowmetry evaluation were measured at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively and compared between the four groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Urethral stenosis recurred in two (9.5%) patients in the DVIU + PRP group, three (14.3%) in the DVIU + MMC group, seven (33.3%) in the DVIU + prednisolone group, and nine (42.9%) in the control group. The reduction in stenosis recurrence significantly differed between the four groups (<i>p</i> = 0.040). A significant group difference in stenosis length (<i>p</i> = 0.047) but not in stenosis diameter (<i>p</i> = 0.385) was observed in patients with recurrent stenosis. Furthermore, no significant difference in Q<sub>max</sub> was found between the groups at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively (<i>p</i> = 0.588, <i>p</i> = 0.047, <i>p</i> = 0.067, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Different intralesional treatments combined with internal urethrotomy demonstrate varying efficacy in reducing urethral stricture recurrence. Considering its high success rate, low cost, and reduced side effects, PRP may be the preferred intralesional treatment option in combination with DVIU.</p>","PeriodicalId":48852,"journal":{"name":"Archivos Espanoles De Urologia","volume":"77 9","pages":"978-983"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archivos Espanoles De Urologia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56434/j.arch.esp.urol.20247709.139","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of various injection therapy agents used in combination with internal urethrotomy in preventing fibrosis and stricture recurrence.

Materials and methods: Patients who underwent direct vision internal urethrotomy (DVIU) in our clinic between 2017 and 2022 were retrospectively screened. The patients were divided into four groups: DVIU + intralesional platelet-rich plasma (DVIU + PRP group, n = 21), DVIU + intralesional mitomycin-C (DVIU + MMC group, n = 21), DVIU + intralesional prednisolone (DVIU + prednisolone group, n = 21), and DVIU alone (control group, n = 21). The length (mm) and diameter (mm) of the recurrent urethral strictures and maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) on uroflowmetry evaluation were measured at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively and compared between the four groups.

Results: Urethral stenosis recurred in two (9.5%) patients in the DVIU + PRP group, three (14.3%) in the DVIU + MMC group, seven (33.3%) in the DVIU + prednisolone group, and nine (42.9%) in the control group. The reduction in stenosis recurrence significantly differed between the four groups (p = 0.040). A significant group difference in stenosis length (p = 0.047) but not in stenosis diameter (p = 0.385) was observed in patients with recurrent stenosis. Furthermore, no significant difference in Qmax was found between the groups at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively (p = 0.588, p = 0.047, p = 0.067, respectively).

Conclusions: Different intralesional treatments combined with internal urethrotomy demonstrate varying efficacy in reducing urethral stricture recurrence. Considering its high success rate, low cost, and reduced side effects, PRP may be the preferred intralesional treatment option in combination with DVIU.

病变内治疗与尿道内切开术有区别吗?
背景:本研究旨在比较各种注射治疗药物联合内尿道切开术预防纤维化和狭窄复发的疗效。材料和方法:回顾性筛选2017年至2022年在我院行直接视觉内尿道切开术(DVIU)的患者。将患者分为4组:DVIU +斑块内富血小板血浆组(DVIU + PRP组,n = 21)、DVIU +斑块内丝裂霉素- c组(DVIU + MMC组,n = 21)、DVIU +斑块内强的松龙组(DVIU +强的松龙组,n = 21)、DVIU单独使用(对照组,n = 21)。分别于术后1、3、6个月测量四组复发性尿道狭窄长度(mm)、直径(mm)及尿流法评价最大尿流率(Qmax),并进行比较。结果:DVIU + PRP组复发2例(9.5%),DVIU + MMC组复发3例(14.3%),DVIU +强的松龙组复发7例(33.3%),对照组复发9例(42.9%)。四组狭窄复发率差异有统计学意义(p = 0.040)。复发性狭窄患者狭窄长度组间差异有统计学意义(p = 0.047),狭窄直径组间差异无统计学意义(p = 0.385)。此外,术后1、3、6个月各组间Qmax差异无统计学意义(p = 0.588, p = 0.047, p = 0.067)。结论:不同的病灶内治疗联合尿道内切开术对减少尿道狭窄复发有不同的疗效。PRP成功率高,成本低,副作用少,可能是局部内治疗与DVIU联合的首选选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Archivos Espanoles De Urologia
Archivos Espanoles De Urologia UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
111
期刊介绍: Archivos Españoles de Urología published since 1944, is an international peer review, susbscription Journal on Urology with original and review articles on different subjets in Urology: oncology, endourology, laparoscopic, andrology, lithiasis, pediatrics , urodynamics,... Case Report are also admitted.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信