Background Image
Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  160 / 492 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 160 / 492 Next Page
Page Background

08:33 - 08:36

S12-7

(PP)

DISTAL HYPOSPADIAS REPAIR: COMPARATIVE UROFLOWMETRY, WHAT IS

NORMAL?

Anna RADFORD

1

, Anne-Francoise SPINOIT

2

, Junaid ASHRAF

1

, Milan GOPAL

1

and Ramnath SUBRAMANIAM

1

1) Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Department of Paediatric Urology and Surgery, Leeds, UNITED KINGDOM - 2)

Gent University Hospital, Department of Urology, Gent, BELGIUM

PURPOSE

Uroflowmetry is recommended for functional assessment after hypospadias repair. This consecutive series reports

prospective uroflowmetry of distal hypospadias primary repairs (DHPR) and compares these to age and voided-volume

matched controls from two published nomograms.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective database of patients undergoing DHPR was created. Patients were invited for prospective functional

uroflowmetry. Exclusions included: age < 2years or >13years and incomplete uroflow assessments. Maximum flowrate

(QMax), average flowrate (AFR) and voiding time (VT) were compared to nomograms; Gutierrez-Segura et al. J.Urol

1997; 157,1426-1428 and Szabo et al. BJU 1995;76,16-20. Descriptive and non-parametric statistical analysis were

performed.

RESULTS

Between 30/09/2011- 1/04/2014 112 patients underwent DHPR were operated on. After exclusions, 51 patients were

eligible. Median age at surgery was 24.0 months [14-132]; median follow-up 22 months [6-48]. Bell-shaped uroflow

curves were obtained in 48/51 at median of 4.0 [3.0-14.0] years old. Median QMax was 10 ml/s [4-24], matched

median QMax from two nomograms, were 15.2ml/s [10-27.5] and 17ml/s [9-29] significantly different to the study

cohort (p=< 0.001). Median AFR and median VT were 4.0ml/s [1-9] and 21s [9-58] respectively, significantly different

to matched controls; 8.8 [6-15.5] and 8.8 [6-16] (p=<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In our series, asymptomatic boys post distal hypospadias repair, had significantly different uroflowmetry results

compared to nomograms in healthy populations. Uroflowmetry is an important follow-up tool, however further

information is required to improve interpretation of uroflow results in order to accurately evaluate surgical outcomes and

determine “normality” in the hypospadias-repaired population.