Estado de la urología reconstructiva en Colombia: Tratamiento de la estrechez uretral anterior, una encuesta nacional

Resumen

Purpose El tratamiento mínimamente invasivo de la estrechez uretral tiene altas tasas de recurrencia y re-operación a largo plazo, no obstante, encuestas realizadas en otros países han demostrado que los urólogos tienen poca experiencia con la uretroplastia abierta y hay una preferencia a la utilización de las terapias endoscópicas mínimamente invasivas. El objetivo de este estudio, es describir patrones de práctica del tratamiento de la estrechez de uretra anterior en nuestro país.

Métodos Se trata de un estudio observacional descriptivo y para ello se realizó un cuestionario adaptado a nuestro contexto nacional, basado en varios estudios previamente realizados acerca de la experiencia en Urología reconstructiva. Ese cuestionario incluía información sobre la edad, nivel de experiencia en urología general, la experiencia en urología reconstructiva, escenario de la práctica y las técnicas preferidas para el manejo de las estrecheces uretrales pendulares y bulbares. La información fue almacenada de forma anónima, los datos fueron analizados mediante el paquete estadístico SPSS y se realizó un análisis de distribución de frecuencias.

Resultados Se obtuvieron 106 respuestas de los urólogos encuestados. Para el tratamiento de la estrechez uretral pendular la mayoría de los urólogos prefiere el manejo endoscópico mínimamente invasivo, seguido de uretroplastia con injerto con porcentajes de 69,9% y 25,5% respectivamente. Solo el 5% prefiere derivar a sus pacientes a un centro especializado. Para la estrechez de la uretra bulbar se prefiere las técnicas mínimamente invasivas, uretroplastia y remisión a un centro especializado en un 44,3%, 41,5% y 14,2% respectivamente. La población más joven y con formación urológica más reciente tiende a hacer más a menudo la uretroplastia con injerto y menos manejo endoscópico, específicamente la uretrotomía interna. En las ciudades intermedias, hay una predilección por el tratamiento endoscópico, especialmente uretrotomía interna.

Conclusiones El enfoque de tratamiento mínimamente invasivo de la estrechez uretral es el más frecuentemente elegido a pesar de sus pobres tasas de éxito a largo plazo. Es de destacar que las nuevas generaciones de urólogos muestran más interés y dominio de las técnicas abiertas, tratamiento estándar hoy en día y con bajas tasas de recaídas y reoperación a largo plazo.

Abstract

The minimally invasive treatment of urethral stricture has higher recurrence and longterm re operation rates. Surveys in other countries have shown that urologists have little experience with open urethroplasty with a preference to the utilization of minimally invasive therapies. We applied a survey to obtain data about practice patterns of the anterior urethral stricture treatment in our country.

Methods A survey was performed with adapted questions to our national context based on several surveys previously conducted in other countries about experience in Reconstructive Urology. This questionnaire included information about age, experience level in general urology, experience in reconstructive urology, scenario of practice, and the preferred techniques handling the pendular and bulbar urethral strictures. All information was collected anonymous and data were analyzed using the statistical software package SPSS, and a frequency distribution analysis was performed.

Results A total of 106 answers from respondent urologists were obtained. For the treatment of pendular urethral strictures the vast majority of respondents prefer the minimally invasive endoscopic treatment, following by graft urethroplasty with percentages of 69.9% and 25.5% respectively. Only 5% prefer to refer their patients for care at a specialized center. Regarding the bulbar urethral the urologists prefers to perform minimally invasive management, followed by urethroplasty and refer to a specialized center in percentages of 44.3%, 41.5% and 14.2% respectively. The younger and more recent urological trained population tends to make more often graft urethroplasty and less endoscopic management, specifically internal urethrotomy. In the intermediate cities there is a predilection for endoscopic treatment especially internal urethrotomy.

Conclusions The minimally invasive treatment approach of urethral stricture is the most frequently chosen despite its poor long-term success rates. It is noteworthy that the new generations of urologists show more interest and mastery of open techniques, which today is the standard treatment with low relapse and long-term re operation rates.

Palabras clave

uretra - uretrotomía - dilatación uretral - estrechez uretral - uretroplastia - injerto

Keywords

urethra - urethrotomy - urethral dilation - urethral stricture urethroplasty - graft

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 07. Januar 2020

Angenommen: 02. Mai 2020

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
06. Oktober 2020

• Referencias

• 1 Brandes SB. Epidemiology, Etiology, Histology, Classification, and Economic Impact of Urethral Stricture Disease. In: Urethral Reconstructive Surgery. Humana Press; 2008: 53-61
• 2 Stein DM, Thum DJ, Barbagli G. et al. A geographic analysis of male urethral stricture aetiology and location. BJU Int 2013; 112 (06) 830-834
• 3 Mathur R, Aggarwal G, Satsangi B, Khan F, Odiya S. Comprehensive analysis of etiology on the prognosis of urethral strictures [cited 2019 Dec 17];. Int Braz J Urol [Internet] 37 (03) 362-369 ; discussion 369–70. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21756384
• 4 Attwater HL. The history of urethral stricture. BJUI 1943; 15 (02) 39-51
• 5 Chiou RK, Taylor RJ. Changing concepts of urethral stricture management. II: Selection of treatment options. Nebr Med J 1996; 81 (08) 287-291 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8810229 [Internet]
• 6 Heyns CF, Steenkamp JW, De Kock MLS, Whitaker P. Treatment of male urethral strictures: is repeated dilation or internal urethrotomy useful?. J Urol 1998; 160 (02) 356-358
• 7 Steenkamp JW, Heyns CF, de Kock MLS. Internal urethrotomy versus dilation as treatment for male urethral strictures: a prospective, randomized comparison. J Urol 1997; 157 (01) 98-101
• 8 Roehrborn CG, McConnell JD. Analysis of factors contributing to success or failure of 1-stage urethroplasty for urethral stricture disease. J Urol 1994; 151 (04) 869-874 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8126813 [Internet]
• 9 Holm-Nielsen A, Schultz A, Møller-Pedersen V. Direct vision internal urethrotomy. A critical review of 365 operations. Br J Urol 1984; 56 (03) 308-312 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6544616 [Internet]
• 10 Andrich DE, Mundy AR. What is the best technique for urethroplasty?. Eur Urol 2008; 54 (05) 1031-1041
• 11 Chapple C, Andrich D, Atala A. et al. SIU/ICUD Consultation on Urethral Strictures: The management of anterior urethral stricture disease using substitution urethroplasty. Urology 2014; 83 (3, Suppl) S31-S47
• 12 Andrich DE, Dunglison N, Greenwell TJ, Mundy AR. The long-term results of urethroplasty. J Urol 2003; 170 (01) 90-92
• 13 Micheli E, Ranieri A, Peracchia G, Lembo A. End-to-end urethroplasty: long-term results. BJU Int 2002; 90 (01) 68-71
• 14 Wright JL, Wessells H, Nathens AB, Hollingworth W. What is the most cost-effective treatment for 1 to 2-cm bulbar urethral strictures: societal approach using decision analysis. Urology 2006; 67 (05) 889-893
• 15 Rourke KF, Jordan GH. Primary urethral reconstruction: the cost minimized approach to the bulbous urethral stricture. J Urol 2005; 173 (04) 1206-1210
• 16 Chilton CP, Shah PJ, Fowler CG, Tiptaft RC, Blandy JP. The impact of optical urethrotomy on the management of urethral strictures. Br J Urol 1983; 55 (06) 705-710 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6652443 [Internet]
• 17 Bullock TL, Brandes SB. Adult anterior urethral strictures: a national practice patterns survey of board certified urologists in the United States. J Urol 2007; 177 (02) 685-690
• 18 van Leeuwen MA, Brandenburg JJ, Kok ET, Vijverberg PLM, Bosch JLHR. Management of adult anterior urethral stricture disease: nationwide survey among urologists in the Netherlands. Eur Urol 2011; 60 (01) 159-166
• 19 Andrich DE, Mundy AR. A Fellowship programme in reconstructive urological surgery: what is it and what is it for?. BJU Int 2010; 106 (01) 108-111
• 20 Barbagli G, Lazzeri M. Surgical treatment of anterior urethral stricture diseases: brief overview. Int Braz J Urol [Internet] 33 (04) 461-469 . [cited 2019 Dec 17]; from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17767749
• 21 Andrich DE, Greenwell TJ, Mundy AR. Treatment of pelvic fracture-related urethral trauma: a survey of current practice in the UK. BJU Int 2005; 96 (01) 127-130
• 22 Pansadoro V, Emiliozzi P. Internal urethrotomy in the management of anterior urethral strictures: long-term followup. J Urol 1996; 156 (01) 73-75 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8648841 [Internet]
• 23 Santucci R, Eisenberg L. Urethrotomy has a much lower success rate than previously reported. J Urol 2010; 183 (05) 1859-1862
• 24 Gil FG, Benavides JA, Montoya AD. Guia colombiana para el manejo integral de la estrechez de uretra. Revista Urología Colombiana / Colombian. Urol J 2019; 28 (03) 193-195 DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1695018.
• 25 Heinke T, Gerharz EW, Bonfig R, Riedmiller H. Ventral onlay urethroplasty using buccal mucosa for complex stricture repair. Urology 2003; 61 (05) 1004-1007 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12736024 [Internet]
• 26 Cohen AJ, Washington S, Butler C. et al. Altruistic donation to improve survey responses: a global randomized trial. BMC Res Notes 2019; 12 (01) 113 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-019-4146-y.