Advertisement

Urethrogram: Does Postoperative Contrast Extravasation Portend Stricture Recurrence?

      OBJECTIVE

      To demonstrate our hypothesis that the presence of extravasation on postoperative urethrogram is inconsequential for disease recurrence in urethroplasty postoperative follow-up.

      MATERIALS AND METHODS

      We utilized the Trauma and Urologic Reconstructive Network of Surgeons database to assess 1691 patients who underwent urethroplasty and post-operative urethrogram. Anatomic and functional recurrence were defined as <17 Fr stricture documented at 12-month cystoscopy and need for a secondary procedure during 1 year of follow-up, respectively. Our primary outcomes were the sensitivity and positive predictive value of post-operative urethrogram for predicting anatomic and functional recurrence of urethral stricture disease.

      RESULTS

      Among 1101 patients with cystoscopy follow-up, 54 (4.9%) had extravasation on initial postoperative urethrogram. Among those 54, 74.1% developed an anatomic recurrence vs 13% without extravasation (P <.001). Similarly, functional recurrence was 9.3% with extravasation vs 3.2 % without extravasation (P = .04). Patients with extravasation more often reported a postoperative urinary tract infection (12.9% vs 2.7%; P <.01) or wound infection (7.4% vs 2.6%; P = .04). Sensitivity of postoperative urethrogram in predicting any recurrence was 27.3%, specificity 98.7%, positive predictive value 77.8%, and negative predictive value 89.3%. Fourty-five of 54 patients with extravasation had a recurrence of some kind, equating to a 22.2% urethroplasty success rate at 1 year.

      CONCLUSION

      Postoperative urethrogram has a high specificity but low sensitivity for anatomic and functional recurrence during short term follow-up. The positive predictive value of urinary extravasation is high: patients with extravasation incur a high risk of anatomic recurrence within 1 year and such patients may warrant increased monitoring.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Urology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Osterberg EC
        • Murphy G
        • Harris CR
        • et al.
        Cost-effective strategies for the management and treatment of urethral stricture disease.
        Urol Clin North Am. 2017; 44: 11-17https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2016.08.002
        • Sukumar S
        • Elliott SP
        • Myers JB
        • et al.
        Multi-institutional outcomes of endoscopic management of stricture recurrence after bulbar urethroplasty.
        J Urol. 2018; 200: 837-842https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.04.081
        • Kahokehr AA
        • Granieri MA
        • Webster GD
        • et al.
        A critical analysis of bulbar urethroplasty stricture recurrence: characteristics and management.
        J Urol. 2018; 200: 1302-1307https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2018.07.036
        • Erickson BA
        • Elliott SP
        • Voelzke BB
        • et al.
        Multi-institutional 1-year bulbar urethroplasty outcomes using a standardized prospective cystoscopic follow-up protocol.
        Urology. 2014; 84: 213-217https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.01.054
        • Liu JS
        • Dong C
        • Gonzalez CM
        Risk factors and timing of early stricture recurrence after urethroplasty.
        Urology. 2016; 95: 202-207https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2016.04.033
        • Chapman D
        • Kinnaird A
        • Rourke K
        Independent predictors of stricture recurrence following urethroplasty for isolated bulbar urethral strictures.
        J Urol. 2017; 198: 1107-1112https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.05.006
        • Gimbernat H
        • Arance I
        • Redondo C
        • et al.
        Analysis of the factors involved in the failure of urethroplasty in men.
        Actas Urol Esp. 2014; 38: 96-102https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acuro.2013.07.003
        • Breyer BN
        • McAninch JW
        • Whitson JM
        • et al.
        Multivariate analysis of risk factors for long-term urethroplasty outcome.
        J Urol. 2010; 183: 613-617https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.10.018
        • Meeks JJ
        • Erickson BA
        • Granieri MA
        • et al.
        Stricture recurrence after urethroplasty: a systematic review.
        J Urol. 2009; 182: 1266-1270https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.06.027
        • Zaid UB
        • Hawkins M
        • Wilson L
        • et al.
        The cost of surveillance after urethroplasty.
        Urology. 2015; 85: 1195-1199https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2014.12.047
        • Grossgold ET
        • Eswara JR
        • Siegel CL
        • et al.
        Routine urethrography after buccal graft bulbar urethroplasty: the impact of initial urethral leak on surgical success.
        Urology. 2017; 104: 215-219https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.02.015
        • Erickson BA
        • Ghareeb GM
        Definition of successful treatment and optimal follow-up after urethral reconstruction for urethral stricture disease.
        Urol Clin North Am. 2017; 44: 1-9https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2016.08.001
        • Granieri MA
        • Webster GD
        • Peterson AC
        A critical evaluation of the utility of imaging after urethroplasty for bulbar urethral stricture disease.
        Urology. 2016; 91: 203-207https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.12.086
        • Terlecki RP
        • Steele MC
        • Valadez C
        • et al.
        Low yield of early postoperative imaging after anastomotic urethroplasty.
        Urology. 2011; 78: 450-453https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.01.071
        • Stein D
        • Malkawi I
        • Santucci R
        MP15-18 Predictive value of post-urethroplasty voiding cystourethrogram.
        J Urol. 2015; 193https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.901
        • Tam CA
        • Voelzke BB
        • Elliott SP
        • et al.
        Critical analysis of the use of uroflowmetry for urethral stricture disease surveillance.
        Urology. 2016; 91: 197-202https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2015.12.070
        • Baradaran N
        • Fergus KB
        • Moses RA
        • et al.
        Clinical significance of cystoscopic urethral stricture recurrence after anterior urethroplasty: a multi-institution analysis from Trauma and Urologic Reconstructive Network of Surgeons (TURNS).
        World J Urol. 2019; https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02653-6
        • Hoy* N
        • Wood H
        • Angermeier K
        MP55-06 The role of post-operative imaging after ventral onlay buccal mucosal graft bulbar urethroplasty.
        J Urol. 2019; 201https://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0000556669.55471.b2
        • Al-Qudah HS
        • Cavalcanti AG
        • Santucci RA
        Early catheter removal after anterior anastomotic (3 days) and ventral buccal mucosal onlay (7 days) urethroplasty.
        Int Braz j Urol. 2005; 31: 459-464https://doi.org/10.1590/S1677-55382005000500007
        • Surya BV
        • Provet J
        • Johanson KE
        • et al.
        Anastomotic strictures following radical prostatectomy: risk factors and management.
        J Urol. 1990; 143: 755-758
        • Richards KA
        • Cohn JA
        • Large MC
        • et al.
        The effect of length of ureteral resection on benign ureterointestinal stricture rate in ileal conduit or ileal neobladder urinary diversion following radical cystectomy.
        Urol Oncol. 2015; 33 (65.e1–8)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2014.05.015
        • Elkady E
        • Dawod T
        • Teleb M
        • et al.
        Bulbospongiosus muscle sparing urethroplasty versus standard urethroplasty: a comparative study.
        Urology. 2018; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2018.12.028
        • Baradaran N
        • Hampson LA
        • Edwards TC
        • et al.
        Patient-reported outcome measures in urethral reconstruction.
        Curr Urol Rep. 2018; 19: 48https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-018-0797-9
        • Arbique GM
        • Gilleran JP
        • Guild JB
        • et al.
        Radiation exposure during standing voiding cystourethrography in women.
        Urology. 2006; 67: 269-274https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2005.08.051
        • Cousins C.
        Radiological protection of the patient: an integral part of quality of care.
        Health Phys. 2013; 105: 430-433https://doi.org/10.1097/HP.0b013e31829c3536
        • Belsante MJ
        • Zhao LC
        • Hudak SJ
        • et al.
        Cost-effectiveness of risk stratified followup after urethral reconstruction: a decision analysis.
        J Urol. 2013; 190: 1292-1297https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.024
        • Ward RA
        • Brier ME
        Retrospective analyses of large medical databases: what do they tell us?.
        J Am Soc Nephrol. 1999; 10: 429-432