Unintended negative consequences of primary endoscopic realignment for men with pelvic fracture urethral injuries

Timothy J. Tausch, Allen F. Morey, J. Francis Scott, Jay Simhan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose We evaluated the clinical course of patients with pelvic fracture urethral injury referred to our institution to elucidate the differences between initial management strategies.

Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed our institutional review board approved, prospectively maintained urethroplasty database from 2007 to 2013. Patients with pelvic fracture urethral injury were stratified into 2 groups based on initial treatment before referral. Group 1 (21 of 38, 55%) was treated with suprapubic tube placement alone followed by elective bulbomembranous anastomotic urethroplasty and group 2 (17 of 38, 45%) underwent early primary endoscopic realignment. We recorded the number of endoscopic interventions and time from injury to successful definitive treatment. Data regarding stricture length, reconstruction technique and treatment outcomes were analyzed.

Results Among 766 urethroplasties performed during the study interval 38 (5%) consecutive pelvic fracture urethral injury cases were identified with complete information available and all underwent repair with excision with primary anastomosis. For suprapubic tube/bulbomembranous anastomotic urethroplasty cases the mean time to definitive resolution of stenosis was dramatically shorter (7 months, range 3 to 15) compared to primary endoscopic realignment cases (122 months, range 4 to 574; p <0.01). The majority of patients treated with primary endoscopic realignment required multiple endoscopic urethral interventions (median 4, range 1 to 36; p <0.01) and/or experienced various other adverse events which were rarely noted in the suprapubic tube/bulbomembranous anastomotic urethroplasty group (14 of 17 [82%] vs 2 of 21 [10%], p <0.05).

Conclusions Treatment of pelvic fracture urethral disruption injuries with primary endoscopic realignment appears to be associated with unintended negative consequences including additional interventions and a prolonged clinical course.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1720-1724
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Urology
Volume192
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2014

Fingerprint

Wounds and Injuries
Pathologic Constriction
Research Ethics Committees
DNA Repair
Therapeutics
Referral and Consultation
Databases

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Unintended negative consequences of primary endoscopic realignment for men with pelvic fracture urethral injuries. / Tausch, Timothy J.; Morey, Allen F.; Scott, J. Francis; Simhan, Jay.

In: Journal of Urology, Vol. 192, No. 6, 01.12.2014, p. 1720-1724.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Tausch, Timothy J. ; Morey, Allen F. ; Scott, J. Francis ; Simhan, Jay. / Unintended negative consequences of primary endoscopic realignment for men with pelvic fracture urethral injuries. In: Journal of Urology. 2014 ; Vol. 192, No. 6. pp. 1720-1724.
@article{98f293d0dfc24e7ebffc3f159d2c24ef,
title = "Unintended negative consequences of primary endoscopic realignment for men with pelvic fracture urethral injuries",
abstract = "Purpose We evaluated the clinical course of patients with pelvic fracture urethral injury referred to our institution to elucidate the differences between initial management strategies.Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed our institutional review board approved, prospectively maintained urethroplasty database from 2007 to 2013. Patients with pelvic fracture urethral injury were stratified into 2 groups based on initial treatment before referral. Group 1 (21 of 38, 55{\%}) was treated with suprapubic tube placement alone followed by elective bulbomembranous anastomotic urethroplasty and group 2 (17 of 38, 45{\%}) underwent early primary endoscopic realignment. We recorded the number of endoscopic interventions and time from injury to successful definitive treatment. Data regarding stricture length, reconstruction technique and treatment outcomes were analyzed.Results Among 766 urethroplasties performed during the study interval 38 (5{\%}) consecutive pelvic fracture urethral injury cases were identified with complete information available and all underwent repair with excision with primary anastomosis. For suprapubic tube/bulbomembranous anastomotic urethroplasty cases the mean time to definitive resolution of stenosis was dramatically shorter (7 months, range 3 to 15) compared to primary endoscopic realignment cases (122 months, range 4 to 574; p <0.01). The majority of patients treated with primary endoscopic realignment required multiple endoscopic urethral interventions (median 4, range 1 to 36; p <0.01) and/or experienced various other adverse events which were rarely noted in the suprapubic tube/bulbomembranous anastomotic urethroplasty group (14 of 17 [82{\%}] vs 2 of 21 [10{\%}], p <0.05).Conclusions Treatment of pelvic fracture urethral disruption injuries with primary endoscopic realignment appears to be associated with unintended negative consequences including additional interventions and a prolonged clinical course.",
author = "Tausch, {Timothy J.} and Morey, {Allen F.} and Scott, {J. Francis} and Jay Simhan",
year = "2014",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.juro.2014.06.069",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "192",
pages = "1720--1724",
journal = "Journal of Urology",
issn = "0022-5347",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Unintended negative consequences of primary endoscopic realignment for men with pelvic fracture urethral injuries

AU - Tausch, Timothy J.

AU - Morey, Allen F.

AU - Scott, J. Francis

AU - Simhan, Jay

PY - 2014/12/1

Y1 - 2014/12/1

N2 - Purpose We evaluated the clinical course of patients with pelvic fracture urethral injury referred to our institution to elucidate the differences between initial management strategies.Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed our institutional review board approved, prospectively maintained urethroplasty database from 2007 to 2013. Patients with pelvic fracture urethral injury were stratified into 2 groups based on initial treatment before referral. Group 1 (21 of 38, 55%) was treated with suprapubic tube placement alone followed by elective bulbomembranous anastomotic urethroplasty and group 2 (17 of 38, 45%) underwent early primary endoscopic realignment. We recorded the number of endoscopic interventions and time from injury to successful definitive treatment. Data regarding stricture length, reconstruction technique and treatment outcomes were analyzed.Results Among 766 urethroplasties performed during the study interval 38 (5%) consecutive pelvic fracture urethral injury cases were identified with complete information available and all underwent repair with excision with primary anastomosis. For suprapubic tube/bulbomembranous anastomotic urethroplasty cases the mean time to definitive resolution of stenosis was dramatically shorter (7 months, range 3 to 15) compared to primary endoscopic realignment cases (122 months, range 4 to 574; p <0.01). The majority of patients treated with primary endoscopic realignment required multiple endoscopic urethral interventions (median 4, range 1 to 36; p <0.01) and/or experienced various other adverse events which were rarely noted in the suprapubic tube/bulbomembranous anastomotic urethroplasty group (14 of 17 [82%] vs 2 of 21 [10%], p <0.05).Conclusions Treatment of pelvic fracture urethral disruption injuries with primary endoscopic realignment appears to be associated with unintended negative consequences including additional interventions and a prolonged clinical course.

AB - Purpose We evaluated the clinical course of patients with pelvic fracture urethral injury referred to our institution to elucidate the differences between initial management strategies.Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed our institutional review board approved, prospectively maintained urethroplasty database from 2007 to 2013. Patients with pelvic fracture urethral injury were stratified into 2 groups based on initial treatment before referral. Group 1 (21 of 38, 55%) was treated with suprapubic tube placement alone followed by elective bulbomembranous anastomotic urethroplasty and group 2 (17 of 38, 45%) underwent early primary endoscopic realignment. We recorded the number of endoscopic interventions and time from injury to successful definitive treatment. Data regarding stricture length, reconstruction technique and treatment outcomes were analyzed.Results Among 766 urethroplasties performed during the study interval 38 (5%) consecutive pelvic fracture urethral injury cases were identified with complete information available and all underwent repair with excision with primary anastomosis. For suprapubic tube/bulbomembranous anastomotic urethroplasty cases the mean time to definitive resolution of stenosis was dramatically shorter (7 months, range 3 to 15) compared to primary endoscopic realignment cases (122 months, range 4 to 574; p <0.01). The majority of patients treated with primary endoscopic realignment required multiple endoscopic urethral interventions (median 4, range 1 to 36; p <0.01) and/or experienced various other adverse events which were rarely noted in the suprapubic tube/bulbomembranous anastomotic urethroplasty group (14 of 17 [82%] vs 2 of 21 [10%], p <0.05).Conclusions Treatment of pelvic fracture urethral disruption injuries with primary endoscopic realignment appears to be associated with unintended negative consequences including additional interventions and a prolonged clinical course.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84914163421&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84914163421&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2014.06.069

DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2014.06.069

M3 - Article

C2 - 24972309

AN - SCOPUS:84914163421

VL - 192

SP - 1720

EP - 1724

JO - Journal of Urology

JF - Journal of Urology

SN - 0022-5347

IS - 6

ER -