PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
Treatment of urethral stricture is a complex reconstructive urology treatment. Previous surgery in the treatment of urethral stricture increases the risk of urinary incontinence. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the outcome of comparing two preservative or nonsurgical methods, clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) or hydraulic urethral dilatation (HUD). Forty-eight patients diagnosed with symptomatic urethral stricture were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: Nelaton-based dilatation and HUD treatment. Patients were assessed using patient-reported outcome measure for urethral stricture surgery (USS-PROM) through direct clinical interview and were followed up for 12 months. The rate of urinary infection, the need for surgical intervention, and the patient\'s quality of life were considered as outcomes of the interventions. SPSS software, version 20.0, was used for statistical analysis. Overall, 23 (47.9%) patients underwent HUD of stricture and Nelaton-based dilatation of stricture was done in 25 (52.1%) patients. We found that surgical intervention was required in four patients in the HUD group, but 15 patients in the CIC group required surgical intervention. Also, the need for surgical intervention and urinary tract infection (UTI) was significantly greater in the CIC group compared with the HUD group. With respect to the patient-reported outcomes, the mean Peeling\'s voiding picture (Q8) and EQ-VAS score (Q16) in the HUD group (p = .02) were significantly greater than those in the CIC group (p = .02). We obtained excellent results by using an HUD catheter. This safe, simple, well-tolerated, home-based procedure reduced the need for hospital admission to operate for repeat.
摘要：
尿道狭窄的治疗是一种复杂的重建泌尿外科治疗方法。先前手术治疗尿道狭窄会增加尿失禁的风险。因此,这项研究旨在评估比较两种防腐剂或非手术方法的结果，清洁间歇性导尿（CIC）或液压尿道扩张（HUD）。48例诊断为症状性尿道狭窄的患者被纳入研究。将患者随机分为两组：基于Nelaton的扩张和HUD治疗。通过直接临床访谈，使用患者报告的尿道狭窄手术（USS-PROM）结果评估患者，并随访12个月。泌尿感染率,需要手术干预，患者的生活质量被认为是干预措施的结果。SPSS软件,20.0版，用于统计分析。总的来说,23例（47.9％）患者进行了狭窄的HUD，25例（52.1％）患者进行了基于Nelaton的狭窄扩张。我们发现HUD组中的四名患者需要手术干预，但CIC组15例患者需要手术干预。此外，与HUD组相比,CIC组的手术干预和尿路感染(UTI)需求显著增加.关于患者报告的结果，HUD组(p=.02)的平均剥离排尿图像(Q8)和EQ-VAS评分(Q16)显著高于CIC组(p=.02)。我们通过使用HUD导管获得了优异的结果。这个保险箱,简单,耐受性良好,以家庭为基础的手术减少了住院重复手术的需要。
