Vessel-sparing Technique Versus Conventional Repair of PFUI: A Prospective Comparative Study

January 31, 2024 updated by: Mena Hosam Mahdy, Assiut University

Vessel-sparing Technique Versus Conventional Repair of Pelvic Fracture Urethral Injury: A Prospective Comparative Study

Pelvic fracture is associated with urethral injury in about 10% of patients . The common site of injury is at the bulbomembranous Junction and anastomotic urethroplasty with a tension free anastomosis remains the gold standard management for pelvic fracture urethral injury (PFUI) .

Traditional reconstruction of PFUI requires mobilization of the bulbar urethra to reach the prostatic apex with deep dissection of the spongiosum and detachment of the bulb from the perineal membrane at the site of the bulbomembranous urethral injury, a maneuver that requires division of the bulbar arteries . Then, the distal bulb and bulbar urethra will depend on retrograde blood flow through the glans and some perforating branches of the dorsal penile artery and this is usually sufficient to maintain good vitality of the spongiosum and urethra under normal circumstances .

When the distal blood supply to the urethra is compromised, either by congenital anomalies such a hypospadias, by previous surgery, or by the pre-existing pelvic fracture, the retrograde flow to the spongiosum is insufficient . In such cases, traditional anastomotic urethroplasty may result in ischemic bulbar necrosis, leading to a reconstructive failure and these patients usually fail to void soon after removal of the catheter, with subsequent retrograde urethrogram (RUG) showing a long bulbar urethral defect .

In 2007, Jordan et al described a modification to excision and primary anastomosis (EPA) in the proximal bulbar urethral strictures particularly post radical prostatectomy, which includes mobilizing and preserving the bulbar arteries with the continuity of the corpus spongiosum is maintained .

Gomez et al believed that vessel-sparing anastomotic urethroplasty is highly relevant in the PFUI scenario as it can theoretically help to avoid ischemic failure and cold glans syndrome improving sexual arousal. Consequently, they modified the standard reconstructive technique for PFUI by preserving bulbar arterial inflow .

So that, we decide to compare between vessel-sparing technique and conventional repair in management of PFUI through a prospective study.

Study Overview

Status

Not yet recruiting

Intervention / Treatment

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Estimated)

32

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Locations

      • Assiut, Egypt
        • Assiut University
        • Contact:
          • Mohamed O Ali, MD
          • Phone Number: 01112274899

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

N/A

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

patient with pelvis fracture type A , B and C , cystocathater .

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

- Adult male patients ≥ 18 years old with PFUI

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Recurrent cases. • History of concomitant bladder neck injury

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort
Intervention / Treatment
conventional repair
the patients will undergo repair with no regard to the vessels .then follow up by uroflow ,ascending urethrogram and penile doppler .
4. When the bulb and bulbar urethra are exposed and before further dissection, the bulbar arteries are located using a directional doppler ultrasound stethoscope and a decision is made to sacrifice the artery with the lowest doppler signal to preserve the contralateral best artery. The bulbar urethra is then mobilized, circumferentially dissected and separated distally from the corpus cavernosum up to the penoscrotal angle to gain sufficient length for a tension-free end-to-end anastomosis without detachment of the bulb from the perineal body. If the dissection is not sufficient to bridge the gap,inter-corporal septal separation or even an inferior pubectomy are performed. The scarred tissue is removed completely, the proximal urethral segment is exposed as usual with spatulation of the healthy urethral ends and end-to-end anastomosis of the urethra over a silicon catheter is performed. No dissection is performed contralaterally at the bulb to preserve the artery of that side.
the new technique
the patients will undergo repair with sparing of the vessels .then follow up by uroflow ,ascending urethrogram and penile doppler .
4. When the bulb and bulbar urethra are exposed and before further dissection, the bulbar arteries are located using a directional doppler ultrasound stethoscope and a decision is made to sacrifice the artery with the lowest doppler signal to preserve the contralateral best artery. The bulbar urethra is then mobilized, circumferentially dissected and separated distally from the corpus cavernosum up to the penoscrotal angle to gain sufficient length for a tension-free end-to-end anastomosis without detachment of the bulb from the perineal body. If the dissection is not sufficient to bridge the gap,inter-corporal septal separation or even an inferior pubectomy are performed. The scarred tissue is removed completely, the proximal urethral segment is exposed as usual with spatulation of the healthy urethral ends and end-to-end anastomosis of the urethra over a silicon catheter is performed. No dissection is performed contralaterally at the bulb to preserve the artery of that side.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
UROFLOWMETERY
Time Frame: three months after the operation
the speed and feasibility of micturition measured by non invasive pressure flow study Q max more than 10ml/sec
three months after the operation
postmicturition residue
Time Frame: three months after the operation
abdominal ultrasound done to evaluate PMR
three months after the operation
Retrograde Urethrogram RUG
Time Frame: three months after the operation
contrast study to evaluate and delineate the urethera
three months after the operation

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

January 31, 2024

Primary Completion (Estimated)

January 31, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

January 31, 2026

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 31, 2024

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 31, 2024

First Posted (Actual)

February 8, 2024

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

February 8, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 31, 2024

Last Verified

January 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

UNDECIDED

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe