Modified PATIO technique for urethrocutaneous fistula after hypospadias repair: Experience from a tertiary referral hospital.

INTRODUCTION: Urethrocutaneous fistula (UCF) is a common complication after hypospadias repair with an incidence of 5-10%. Several techniques are described for its repair: small UCFs are frequently corrected by isolation, excision, and closure with apposition of a protective second layer. In 2008 Malone described the PATIO technique: the fistula tract is turned inside out in the urethral lumen preventing contact with passing urine without direct urethral sutures. OBJECTIVE: Aim of our study is to present our outcomes using a modified version of the PATIO technique, with a more reproducible isolation of the tract and without its fixation at the urethral meatus. STUDY DESIGN: We retrospectively reviewed all cases of UCFs corrected with a modified PATIO technique at our center between 2016 and 2020. Data collected from electronical clinical notes were age at UCF closure, location of UCF, presence of meatal stenosis and clinical outcomes. Data are presented as median and IQR. RESULTS: In the study period we performed 425 urethroplasties for distal and mid penile hypospadias. The incidence of UCFs was 7% (30/425) and 25 patients underwent UCF correction with modified PATIO. Median age at repair was 4.5 years (IQR: 2.5-6.2). At a median follow-up of 3 years (IQR: 2-4) recurrence was observed in 5 cases out of 24 with one patient who was lost at follow-up (20.8%). One case was corrected successfully with re-do modified PATIO technique, while 4 are awaiting repair. One cases was lost at follow-up. UFC-recurrence was homogeneously distributed along the study period. DISCUSSION: Risk factors for UCF recurrence are mostly the type of hypospadias, neo-urethral length, and quality of the urethral plate. Among the many existing techniques, we propose a modified version of Malone's PATIO repair. We believe that the use of four stay-suture to isolate the fistula allows a well-defined dissection of the tract along its surface, compared to the use of a single stay-suture. In our experience, there is no need to keep and fix the traction on the fistula tract to the urethral meatus, probably reflecting the efficacy of the fistula closure during the introflection, which is then maintained without traction. Limitations to our study include the retrospective nature of the review, the small sample size of the cohort and the absence of control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our results appear consistent with literature regarding the efficacy of PATIO principles in treating UCF. Modified PATIO seem to be particularly reproducible, showing encouraging results.

Endoscopic treatment of ureterocele in children: Results of a single referral tertiary center over a 10 year-period.

INTRODUCTION: The management of UCs remain controversial, especially for UCs with duplex collecting systems that still represent a great challenge in paediatric urology. Several approaches have been used and a shared management is not yet validated. STUDY AIM: Aim of our study is to evaluate the results of the endoscopic treatment of UC comparing ortothopic single-system UC and ectopic duplex-system UC over a 10-year period in a single referral tertiary center. Success was defined as resolution of dilation, lack of urinary infections and preservation of renal function. STUDY DESIGN: We retrospectively reviewed medical records of children with a diagnosis of UC who underwent endoscopic puncture at our division from January 2009 to January 2019. Patients were divided in two groups: Group A composed of patients with ectopic UC associated with renal duplex system and Group B with orthotopic UC in single collecting system. RESULTS: We identified 48 paediatric patients treated with transurethral primary endoscopic incision. Groups result homogeneous for clinical and pathological characteristics. The only statistical significative difference between the two samples was the age at diagnosis (p value with Yates correction = 0.01). DISCUSSION: We considered as a therapeutic success infections control and the elimination of obstruction with preservation of global kidney function. Based on that, our success rate after single (77%) or double (92%) endoscopic treatment is higher than data reported in literature. Differently from previous studies, vescico-ureteral reflux without UTIs was not considered as a failure of the procedure. The present study has some limitations: it is a retrospective and monocentric serie and it lacked a longer follow-up; on the other hand, it has been conducted on a quite large sample size and it is one of the few studies that compares the endoscopic treatment between orthotopic and ectopic UC. CONCLUSION: Our data report primary endoscopic puncture of ureterocele as a simple, effective, and safe procedure also in long-term follow up. This technique avoids the need for additional surgery in the majority of the patients, also in the case of an ectopic UC associated to a duplex system.

Ureteral Reimplantation for Primary Obstructive Megaureter in Pediatric Patients: Is It Time for Robot-Assisted Approach?

Objective: To compare open and robotic approach for treatment of Primary Obstructive Megaureter (POM) in a series of pediatric patients. Materials and Methods: Medical records of all patients who had undergone ureteral reimplantation for POM at our institution, between January 2016 and December 2019, were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Open (Group B) and robotic (Group A) approach were compared. Success was defined as reduction of anteroposterior diameter of pelvis and ureter on postoperative ultrasound scan. Surgical complications were reported according to the Clavien-Dindo Classification. Esthetic results were compared through the Vancouver Scar Scale. Results: Out of 23 patients, 11 belonged to Group A (5M and 6F) and 12 to Group B (9M and 3F). Median age at diagnosis was 38 months in Group A and 46 months in Group B (P = .69). Operative times were comparable (150' Group A and 140' Group B; P = .35), but the hospital stay was significantly shorter in the robotic group (P < .01). Success rate was comparable: 90.9% in Group A and 91.7% in Group B, respectively (P = .95). Incidence of early complications was 9.1% in Group A (grade IIIB) and 8.3% in Group B (grade II) (P = .95). Esthetic evaluation obtained a median score of 1 in Group A and 3 in Group B (P < .01). Conclusions: Our preliminary experience shows that robotic reimplantation can be a safe option in the treatment of POM in pediatric patients with clinical outcomes comparable to the open technique.

Comparison of Cosmetic Results in Children >10 Years Old Undergoing Open, Laparoscopic or Robotic-Assisted Pyeloplasty: A Multicentric Study.

PURPOSE: Our goal was to compare surgical scars assessed by a validated patient reported outcome questionnaire in children undergoing open (OP), laparoscopic (LP), or robotic-assisted (RALP) pyeloplasty. Our secondary aim was to assess the influence on the outcomes of variables such as gender or body mass index (BMI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an observational, cross-sectional, multicentric study of patients undergoing primary pyeloplasty between age 10 and 18 years at 5 tertiary Italian institutions during the period January 2010 to December 2019. Of 227 eligible patients 114 (50%) participated. OP was performed in 37 (32%), LP in 30 (26%) and RALP in 47 (41%), After a median (IQR) followup of 5.2 (2.3-7.8) years, scars were measured and assessed by a validated Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire. Scores were compared among techniques and in accordance with several variables. RESULTS: The median length of the surgical scar at followup was significantly larger (p <0.0001) after OP (8.1 cm vs 1.8 cm for LP and 2.0 cm for RALP), where scar length correlated with BMI (p=0.04). Ninety patients (79%) had a Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire score within the first quartile, the most favorable. During followup, 43 (38%) participants reported scar-related symptom. Symptoms were generally more common after OP (54% vs 30% for LP and 30% for RALP, p=0.06) and scar hyperesthesia was significantly more frequent after OP (p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Perception of the cosmetic outcomes in pre-adolescents and adolescents after pyeloplasty was generally good. LP achieved the best cosmetic results. OP was more commonly associated with scar-related symptoms and the size of the incision paralleled BMI.

Check cystoscopy in the management of anterior urethral valves in a cohort of pediatric patients.

INTRODUCTION: Anterior urethral valves (AUV) are a rare cause of lower urinary tract obstruction which could progress to renal damage, Clinical presentation varies according with patient's age and severity of obstruction, but, in most cases, diagnosis is based on voiding cysto-urethrogram (VCUG). To date, the treatment of choice is endoscopic ablation even if approved guidelines about the overall management of AUVs, including the recognition and treatment of residual valves, are not available. OBJECTIVE: We describe our protocol for AUV treatment based on primary endoscopic valve ablation followed by check cystoscopy 15 days later. STUDY DESIGN: Medical records of 5 patients with AUVs admitted from 2008 to 2018 to our Pediatric Urology Unit were retrospectively reviewed. Blood tests, urinalysis, renal US and VCUG were performed in all children, while urodynamic evaluation was performed in the 3/5 patients who could void spontaneously. All patients underwent endoscopic valves ablation and after 15 days after a second look cystoscopy was performed. Follow up was based on clinical and radiological evaluation with US, urinalysis and blood tests. Postoperative non-invasive urodynamic studies were performed in the 3/5 patient toilet-trained patients and VCUG was performed in 1/5 patient. RESULTS: and Discussion: At primary endoscopic ablation cystoscopy revealed AUVs in the penile urethra in three patients, in the penoscrotal urethra in one case, in the bulbar urethra in another case. In 3/5 patients check cystoscopy found residual valves and a second endoscopic ablation was performed. All patients achieved symptoms release and improved urodynamic parameters. No intra or post-operative complication were reported. The assessment of residual valves is variable in literature and it is usually described for posterior urethral valves (PUVs). Few series report the use of VCUG within the first week after valve ablation, our experience instead suggests that performing a second look cystoscopy, is very effective to evaluate the presence of residual AUVs and eventually proceed with further ablation. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic ablation is the gold standard treatment for AUV, but residual valves management is not clearly defined. According to our experience, a check cystoscopy 15 days after primary ablation allows to identify and treat possible residual valves showing good results in terms of safety and efficacy.