Use and outcomes of amplatz renal dilator for treatment of urethral strictures.

INTRODUCTION: Urethral stricture disease is still a major problem in men. Many procedures are available for the treatment of urethral strictures; urethral dilatation is one of the oldest. The blind dilatation of urethral strictures may be a difficult and potentially dangerous procedure. The purpose of this study was to describe safe urethral dilatation using amplatz renal dilator and to report outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2010 to 2014, a total of 26 men with primary urethral strictures were managed by urethral dilatation using amplatz renal dilators. The parameters analyzed included presentation of patients, retrograde urethrography (RGU) findings, pre-and postoperative maximum flow rate (Qmax) on uroflowmetry (UF) and post-void residual urine (PVR). Patients were followed-up at 1.6 and 12 months. The technique described in this paper enables such strictures to be safely dilated after endoscopic placement of a suitable guidewire and stylet over which amplatz renal dilators are introduced. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 57.6 (35-72) years. The median stricture length was 0.82 (0.6-1.5)cm. Pre-operative uroflowmetry showed Qmax of 7.00 (4-12) mL/sec and ultrasonography showed PVR of 75.00 (45-195)mL. Postoperatively, Qmax improved to 18.00 (15-22)mL/sec (p<0.001) at 1 month, 17.00 (13-21)mL/sec (p<0.001) at 6 months and 15.00 (12-17)mL/sec (p<0.001) at 12 months. The post-operative PVR values were 22.50 (10-60)mL (p<0.001), 30.00 (10-70)mL (p<0.001) and 30.00 (10-70) mL (p<0.001) at 1.6 12 months, respectively. The median procedure time was 15.00 (12-22) minutes. None of the patients had a recurrence during a 12-month period of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Urethral dilatation with amplatz renal dilators avoids the risks associated with blind dilatation techniques. This tecnique is a safe, easy, well-tolerated and cost-effective alternative for treatment of urethral strictures.

2% Lidocaine gel or plain lubricating gel: Which one should be used in male flexible cystoscopy?

OBJECTIVE: To investigate and compare the effects on pain of intraurethral 2% lidocaine gel and plain lubricating gel in male patients underwent flexible cystoscopy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The data of 220 male patients who underwent flexible cystoscopy between March 2012 and August 2014 were retrospectively analized. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to using intraurethral gel types. Group I included 120 patients who were underwent flexible cystoscopy with 2% lidocaine gel and Group II was consisted from 100 patients who underwent flexible cystoscopy with plain lubricating gel. The groups were compared according to postprocedure data including pain score, procedure time and age of patients. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients in Group I was 50.02±11.87 years while that in Group II was 52.03±13.37 years (p=0.492). The mean procedure times were 6.02±0.787 and 6.28±0.689 minutes in Group I and Group II respectively (p=0.061). Pain perception scores were not statistically different between the groups (Group I: 3.10±0.980, Group II: 3.34±0.789, p=0.132). CONCLUSION: Use of intraurethral 2% lidocaine gel has no advantage over plain lubricating gel in regard to pain control during flexible cystoscopy in men.

Prophylactic effects of alpha-blockers, Tamsulosin and Alfuzosin, on postoperative urinary retention in male patients undergoing urologic surgery under spinal anaesthesia.

PURPOSE: Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) is one of the most common complications after surgical procedures under spinal anaesthesia. Recent studies have shown the beneficial effects of alpha-adrenergic blockers in preventing POUR. The aim of this prospective study was to investigate and compare the prophylactic effects of tamsulosin and alfuzosin on POUR after urologic surgical procedures under spinal anaesthesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 180 males who underwent elective urologic surgery were included in this study. The patients were randomly allocated into three Groups. The Group I received placebo. Patients in Group II were given 0.4mg of tamsulosin orally 14 and 2 hours before surgery. Patients in Group III were given 10mg of alfuzosin ER orally 10 and 2 hours before surgery. All patients were closely followed for 24 hours postoperatively and their episodes of urinary retentions were recorded. RESULTS: There were 60 patients in each Group. Their mean age was 35.95±15.16 years. Fifteen patients in Group I (25%), 3 patients in Group II (5%) and 4 patients in Group III (6.7%) required catheterization because of urinary retention. In tamsulosin group and alfuzosin group, there were a significantly lower proportion of patients with POUR compared with the placebo Group (p=0.002 and p=0.006). The beneficial effects of tamsulosin and alfuzosin on POUR were similar between both Groups (p=0.697). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the use of prophylactic tamsulosin or alfuzosin can reduce the incidence of urinary retention and the need for catheterization after urologic surgical procedures under spinal anaesthesia.

Prophylactic effects of alpha-blockers, Tamsulosin and Alfuzosin, on postoperative urinary retention in male patients undergoing urologic surgery under spinal anaesthesia

ABSTRACT Purpose Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) is one of the most common complications after surgical procedures under spinal anaesthesia. Recent studies have shown the beneficial effects of alpha-adrenergic blockers in preventing POUR. The aim of this prospective study was to investigate and compare the prophylactic effects of tamsulosin and alfuzosin on POUR after urologic surgical procedures under spinal anaesthesia. Materials and Methods A total of 180 males who underwent elective urologic surgery were included in this study. The patients were randomly allocated into three Groups. The Group I received placebo. Patients in Group II were given 0.4mg of tamsulosin orally 14 and 2 hours before surgery. Patients in Group III were given 10mg of alfuzosin ER orally 10 and 2 hours before surgery. All patients were closely followed for 24 hours postoperatively and their episodes of urinary retentions were recorded. Results There were 60 patients in each Group. Their mean age was 35.95±15.16 years. Fifteen patients in Group I (25%), 3 patients in Group II (5%) and 4 patients in Group III (6.7%) required catheterization because of urinary retention. In tamsulosin group and alfuzosin group, there were a significantly lower proportion of patients with POUR compared with the placebo Group (p=0.002 and p=0.006). The beneficial effects of tamsulosin and alfuzosin on POUR were similar between both Groups (p=0.697). Conclusion This study suggests that the use of prophylactic tamsulosin or alfuzosin can reduce the incidence of urinary retention and the need for catheterization after urologic surgical procedures under spinal anaesthesia.

Use and outcomes of amplatz renal dilator for treatment of urethral strictures

ABSTRACT Introduction Urethral stricture disease is still a major problem in men. Many procedures are available for the treatment of urethral strictures; urethral dilatation is one of the oldest. The blind dilatation of urethral strictures may be a difficult and potentially dangerous procedure. The purpose of this study was to describe safe urethral dilatation using amplatz renal dilator and to report outcomes. Materials and Methods From 2010 to 2014, a total of 26 men with primary urethral strictures were managed by urethral dilatation using amplatz renal dilators. The parameters analyzed included presentation of patients, retrograde urethrography (RGU) findings, pre-and postoperative maximum flow rate (Qmax) on uroflowmetry (UF) and post-void residual urine (PVR). Patients were followed-up at 1.6 and 12 months. The technique described in this paper enables such strictures to be safely dilated after endoscopic placement of a suitable guidewire and stylet over which amplatz renal dilators are introduced. Results The mean age of the patients was 57.6 (35–72) years. The median stricture length was 0.82 (0.6–1.5)cm. Pre-operative uroflowmetry showed Qmax of 7.00 (4–12) mL/sec and ultrasonography showed PVR of 75.00 (45–195)mL. Postoperatively, Qmax improved to 18.00 (15–22)mL/sec (p<0.001) at 1 month, 17.00 (13–21)mL/sec (p<0.001) at 6 months and 15.00 (12–17)mL/sec (p<0.001) at 12 months. The post-operative PVR values were 22.50 (10–60)mL (p<0.001), 30.00 (10–70)mL (p<0.001) and 30.00 (10–70) mL (p<0.001) at 1.6 12 months, respectively. The median procedure time was 15.00 (12–22) minutes. None of the patients had a recurrence during a 12-month period of follow-up. Conclusion Urethral dilatation with amplatz renal dilators avoids the risks associated with blind dilatation techniques. This tecnique is a safe, easy, well-tolerated and cost-effective alternative for treatment of urethral strictures.