Prostatomembranous urethral disruptions

Management by suprapubic cystostomy and delayed urethroplasty

D. A. Husmann, W. T. Wilson, T. B. Boone, T. D. Allen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

64 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Management of prostatomembranous urethral disruptions associated with pelvic fractures remains a major controversy in urology. A group of 64 patients who suffered a prostatomembranous urethral disruption in association with a pelvic fracture and who were managed initially by suprapubic cystostomy with delayed urethroplasty was compared to 17 patients managed initially by primary realignment. No statistically significant difference in the incidence of impotence or urinary incontinence was found between the 2 groups (p > 0.5). Secondary reconstructions for impassable strictures developed in 95% of the patients treated by a suprapubic tube alone compared to 53% of those treated by primary realignment. Indeed, only 1 patient in the latter group achieved urethral continuity that did not require further intervention. We conclude that while primary realignment is associated with no increase in the instance of impotence and urinary incontinence, it subjects the patient to a major operation at a critical time and provides little in the way of long-term positive gains for the effort expended. In the final analysis the outcome is more dependent upon the nature of the injury and the quality of the repair than upon the order in which the repair is effected.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)76-78
Number of pages3
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume144
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 1 1990

Fingerprint

Cystostomy
Urinary Incontinence
Erectile Dysfunction
Urology
Pathologic Constriction
Incidence
Wounds and Injuries

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Prostatomembranous urethral disruptions : Management by suprapubic cystostomy and delayed urethroplasty. / Husmann, D. A.; Wilson, W. T.; Boone, T. B.; Allen, T. D.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 144, No. 1, 01.01.1990, p. 76-78.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8691a28b6409438aa191e937c7c8ad61,
title = "Prostatomembranous urethral disruptions: Management by suprapubic cystostomy and delayed urethroplasty",
abstract = "Management of prostatomembranous urethral disruptions associated with pelvic fractures remains a major controversy in urology. A group of 64 patients who suffered a prostatomembranous urethral disruption in association with a pelvic fracture and who were managed initially by suprapubic cystostomy with delayed urethroplasty was compared to 17 patients managed initially by primary realignment. No statistically significant difference in the incidence of impotence or urinary incontinence was found between the 2 groups (p > 0.5). Secondary reconstructions for impassable strictures developed in 95{\%} of the patients treated by a suprapubic tube alone compared to 53{\%} of those treated by primary realignment. Indeed, only 1 patient in the latter group achieved urethral continuity that did not require further intervention. We conclude that while primary realignment is associated with no increase in the instance of impotence and urinary incontinence, it subjects the patient to a major operation at a critical time and provides little in the way of long-term positive gains for the effort expended. In the final analysis the outcome is more dependent upon the nature of the injury and the quality of the repair than upon the order in which the repair is effected.",
author = "Husmann, {D. A.} and Wilson, {W. T.} and Boone, {T. B.} and Allen, {T. D.}",
year = "1990",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "144",
pages = "76--78",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prostatomembranous urethral disruptions

T2 - Management by suprapubic cystostomy and delayed urethroplasty

AU - Husmann, D. A.

AU - Wilson, W. T.

AU - Boone, T. B.

AU - Allen, T. D.

PY - 1990/1/1

Y1 - 1990/1/1

N2 - Management of prostatomembranous urethral disruptions associated with pelvic fractures remains a major controversy in urology. A group of 64 patients who suffered a prostatomembranous urethral disruption in association with a pelvic fracture and who were managed initially by suprapubic cystostomy with delayed urethroplasty was compared to 17 patients managed initially by primary realignment. No statistically significant difference in the incidence of impotence or urinary incontinence was found between the 2 groups (p > 0.5). Secondary reconstructions for impassable strictures developed in 95% of the patients treated by a suprapubic tube alone compared to 53% of those treated by primary realignment. Indeed, only 1 patient in the latter group achieved urethral continuity that did not require further intervention. We conclude that while primary realignment is associated with no increase in the instance of impotence and urinary incontinence, it subjects the patient to a major operation at a critical time and provides little in the way of long-term positive gains for the effort expended. In the final analysis the outcome is more dependent upon the nature of the injury and the quality of the repair than upon the order in which the repair is effected.

AB - Management of prostatomembranous urethral disruptions associated with pelvic fractures remains a major controversy in urology. A group of 64 patients who suffered a prostatomembranous urethral disruption in association with a pelvic fracture and who were managed initially by suprapubic cystostomy with delayed urethroplasty was compared to 17 patients managed initially by primary realignment. No statistically significant difference in the incidence of impotence or urinary incontinence was found between the 2 groups (p > 0.5). Secondary reconstructions for impassable strictures developed in 95% of the patients treated by a suprapubic tube alone compared to 53% of those treated by primary realignment. Indeed, only 1 patient in the latter group achieved urethral continuity that did not require further intervention. We conclude that while primary realignment is associated with no increase in the instance of impotence and urinary incontinence, it subjects the patient to a major operation at a critical time and provides little in the way of long-term positive gains for the effort expended. In the final analysis the outcome is more dependent upon the nature of the injury and the quality of the repair than upon the order in which the repair is effected.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025297439&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025297439&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 144

SP - 76

EP - 78

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 1

ER -