A Randomized Prospective Trial of Primary Versus AlloDerm Closure of Buccal Mucosal Graft Harvest Site for Substitution Urethroplasty

Objectives

To present a prospective, randomized trial comparing primary and AlloDerm closure of the oral harvest site. The use of buccal mucosa grafts for substitution urethroplasty is an established and durable technique. The optimal management of the buccal mucosa grafts harvest site for the intraoral defect has yet to be determined.

Methods

Between February 2003 and September 2006, a total of 20 men undergoing buccal mucosal urethroplasty were randomly assigned to either primary (n = 10) or AlloDerm closure (n = 10) of the oral harvest site. All patients were clinically examined postoperatively and each completed a 10-point analog pain score and descriptive questionnaire postoperatively, at 3 weeks, and at 3, 6, and 12 months.

Results

A 100% of patients completed the study at 12 months follow-up. Oral pain dissipated acutely after 3 weeks. No significant differences in either neurosensory or mouth tightness symptoms were noted, except increased incidence of cheek swelling at 3 weeks in the AlloDerm group.

Conclusions

AlloDerm proved to be an effective means of closing the harvest site, but offered no significant advantages when compared with primary closure. AlloDerm closure was associated with increased morbidity in mouth tightness symptoms, cheek swelling, and discomfort while chewing food; only increased incidence of cheek swelling at 3 weeks was found to be significant. Despite its excellent molecular properties and nonimmunogenic nature, the role of AlloDerm graft use in closing the buccal mucosal harvest site appears to be an unnecessary step. Primary closure was extremely well tolerated in both short- and long-term follow-up, with minimal sequelae at 12 months.