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...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
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 |