The comparison of interrupted and continuous suturing technique in Snodgrass urethroplasty in patients with primary hypospadias: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 0.7 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Urology Annals Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-11-08 DOI:10.4103/ua.ua_100_22
Nitinkumar Borkar, Charu Tiwari, Debajyoti Mohanty, Sunita Singh, Anjan Dhua
{"title":"The comparison of interrupted and continuous suturing technique in Snodgrass urethroplasty in patients with primary hypospadias: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Nitinkumar Borkar,&nbsp;Charu Tiwari,&nbsp;Debajyoti Mohanty,&nbsp;Sunita Singh,&nbsp;Anjan Dhua","doi":"10.4103/ua.ua_100_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hypospadias is among the common congenital anomalies in boys. Snodgrass urethroplasty is one of the most popular techniques for correcting distal and mid hypospadias. Although there is consensus among pediatric surgeons on using absorbable sutures for urethroplasty, there are no established guidelines about the suturing techniques (interrupted suturing [IS] or continuous suturing [CS]) for neourethra creation in Snodgrass urethroplasty. This analysis aims to compare the reported outcomes of both the urethroplasty suturing techniques.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted as per the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analyses guidelines. A systematic, detailed search was carried out by the authors in the electronic databases - MEDLINE, PubMed Central, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Clinical Trial Registry. Studies were selected and compared based on primary outcomes - development of urethrocutaneous fistula (UCF), meatal stenosis, and secondary outcomes - wound infection, urethral stricture, and operative time. Statistical analysis was performed using a fixed-effect model, pooled risk ratio, and <i>I</i>2 heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five randomized studies with a total of 521 patients met our inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis for total complications, UCF, meatal stenosis, and wound infection showed no significant difference between the CS and IS groups. Subgroup analysis of patients with the use of polyglactin sutures showed a decrease in total complications and UCF in the IS group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is no difference in total complication rates among the CS and the IS group with the use of absorbable sutures in Snodgrass urethroplasty; however, there is a decrease in the incidence of total complications and UCF in the IS group when polyglactin was preferred over polydioxanone suture for urethroplasty.</p>","PeriodicalId":23633,"journal":{"name":"Urology Annals","volume":"15 1","pages":"74-81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/f1/3e/UA-15-74.PMC10062508.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urology Annals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ua.ua_100_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/11/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Hypospadias is among the common congenital anomalies in boys. Snodgrass urethroplasty is one of the most popular techniques for correcting distal and mid hypospadias. Although there is consensus among pediatric surgeons on using absorbable sutures for urethroplasty, there are no established guidelines about the suturing techniques (interrupted suturing [IS] or continuous suturing [CS]) for neourethra creation in Snodgrass urethroplasty. This analysis aims to compare the reported outcomes of both the urethroplasty suturing techniques.

Materials and methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted as per the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analyses guidelines. A systematic, detailed search was carried out by the authors in the electronic databases - MEDLINE, PubMed Central, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Clinical Trial Registry. Studies were selected and compared based on primary outcomes - development of urethrocutaneous fistula (UCF), meatal stenosis, and secondary outcomes - wound infection, urethral stricture, and operative time. Statistical analysis was performed using a fixed-effect model, pooled risk ratio, and I2 heterogeneity.

Results: Five randomized studies with a total of 521 patients met our inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis for total complications, UCF, meatal stenosis, and wound infection showed no significant difference between the CS and IS groups. Subgroup analysis of patients with the use of polyglactin sutures showed a decrease in total complications and UCF in the IS group.

Conclusion: There is no difference in total complication rates among the CS and the IS group with the use of absorbable sutures in Snodgrass urethroplasty; however, there is a decrease in the incidence of total complications and UCF in the IS group when polyglactin was preferred over polydioxanone suture for urethroplasty.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Snodgrass尿道成形术中间断和连续缝合技术在原发性尿道下裂患者中的比较:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。
背景:尿道下裂是男孩常见的先天性畸形之一。Snodgrass尿道成形术是矫正尿道下裂远端和中段最流行的技术之一。尽管儿科外科医生对使用可吸收缝线进行尿道成形术达成了共识,但对于Snodgrass尿道成形术中新尿道形成的缝合技术(间断缝合[is]或连续缝合[CS]),目前还没有既定的指南。本分析旨在比较两种尿道成形术缝合技术的报告结果。材料和方法:本系统综述和荟萃分析是根据系统综述和元分析指南的首选报告项目进行的。作者在MEDLINE、PubMed Central、Scopus、Google Scholar和临床试验注册中心等电子数据库中进行了系统、详细的搜索。根据主要结果(尿道经皮瘘(UCF)的发展、尿道狭窄)和次要结果(伤口感染、尿道狭窄和手术时间)选择并比较研究。使用固定效应模型、合并风险比和I2异质性进行统计分析。结果:5项随机研究共521名患者符合我们的纳入标准。CS组和IS组的总并发症、UCF、肉道狭窄和伤口感染的汇总分析显示没有显著差异。对使用聚肌动蛋白缝线的患者进行的亚组分析显示,IS组的总并发症和UCF减少。结论:在Snodgrass尿道成形术中,CS组和is组的总并发症发生率没有差异;然而,当在尿道成形术中首选聚肌动蛋白而不是聚二氧烷酮缝线时,is组的总并发症和UCF的发生率降低。
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
Urology Annals
Urology Annals UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
审稿时长
31 weeks
×
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