Cargando…

Buccal mucosa or penile skin for substitution urethroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Penile skin (PSG) and the buccal mucosa (BMGs) are the most commonly used grafts for substitution urethroplasty. The aim of this study was to compare the success rates of substitution urethroplasty using either of these grafts. We systematically searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of sci...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sharma, Gopal, Sharma, Sneha, Parmar, Kalpesh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7279095/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32549657
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/iju.IJU_298_19
_version_ 1783543483200438272
author Sharma, Gopal
Sharma, Sneha
Parmar, Kalpesh
author_facet Sharma, Gopal
Sharma, Sneha
Parmar, Kalpesh
author_sort Sharma, Gopal
collection PubMed
description Penile skin (PSG) and the buccal mucosa (BMGs) are the most commonly used grafts for substitution urethroplasty. The aim of this study was to compare the success rates of substitution urethroplasty using either of these grafts. We systematically searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of science to identify studies comparing the two types of graft urethroplasties. Search strategy was based on Patient, Intervention, Control and Outcome guidelines. Studies reporting data on success of PSG versus BMG within the same manuscript were included. Standard Preferred reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Metaanalysis guidelines were followed while conducting this review and study protocol was registered with PROSPERO in priori (CRD42018114258). Sixteen studies, including 5 prospective and 11 retrospective studies, with a total of 1406 (896 BMG and 510 PSG) patients were included in the final analysis. In the overall analysis, BMG had significantly higher success rate (83.7% vs. 76.1%, P ≤ 0.0001). Duration of followup was heterogeneous across the studies, ranging from 15.9 to 201 months. Comparing the five studies where the data on duration of follow up was available, BMG showed a significantly higher success rate compared to PSG (90% vs. 80.4%; P = 0.02). In the subgroup of patients with bulbar urethral strictures, BMG urethroplasty had significantly higher success rate (87.4% vs. 78.0%; P = 0.0001). From the results of this study, buccal mucosa may appear to be a better choice, however, the data is still immature and a properly conducted randomized controlled trial with an adequate duration of followup is required.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7279095
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72790952020-06-16 Buccal mucosa or penile skin for substitution urethroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis Sharma, Gopal Sharma, Sneha Parmar, Kalpesh Indian J Urol Review Article Penile skin (PSG) and the buccal mucosa (BMGs) are the most commonly used grafts for substitution urethroplasty. The aim of this study was to compare the success rates of substitution urethroplasty using either of these grafts. We systematically searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of science to identify studies comparing the two types of graft urethroplasties. Search strategy was based on Patient, Intervention, Control and Outcome guidelines. Studies reporting data on success of PSG versus BMG within the same manuscript were included. Standard Preferred reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Metaanalysis guidelines were followed while conducting this review and study protocol was registered with PROSPERO in priori (CRD42018114258). Sixteen studies, including 5 prospective and 11 retrospective studies, with a total of 1406 (896 BMG and 510 PSG) patients were included in the final analysis. In the overall analysis, BMG had significantly higher success rate (83.7% vs. 76.1%, P ≤ 0.0001). Duration of followup was heterogeneous across the studies, ranging from 15.9 to 201 months. Comparing the five studies where the data on duration of follow up was available, BMG showed a significantly higher success rate compared to PSG (90% vs. 80.4%; P = 0.02). In the subgroup of patients with bulbar urethral strictures, BMG urethroplasty had significantly higher success rate (87.4% vs. 78.0%; P = 0.0001). From the results of this study, buccal mucosa may appear to be a better choice, however, the data is still immature and a properly conducted randomized controlled trial with an adequate duration of followup is required. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020 2020-04-07 /pmc/articles/PMC7279095/ /pubmed/32549657 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/iju.IJU_298_19 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Indian Journal of Urology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Review Article
Sharma, Gopal
Sharma, Sneha
Parmar, Kalpesh
Buccal mucosa or penile skin for substitution urethroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title Buccal mucosa or penile skin for substitution urethroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Buccal mucosa or penile skin for substitution urethroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Buccal mucosa or penile skin for substitution urethroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Buccal mucosa or penile skin for substitution urethroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Buccal mucosa or penile skin for substitution urethroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort buccal mucosa or penile skin for substitution urethroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7279095/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32549657
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/iju.IJU_298_19
work_keys_str_mv AT sharmagopal buccalmucosaorpenileskinforsubstitutionurethroplastyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT sharmasneha buccalmucosaorpenileskinforsubstitutionurethroplastyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT parmarkalpesh buccalmucosaorpenileskinforsubstitutionurethroplastyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis