Evidence Hub

Long-term outcomes in primary male epispadias

Thomas JS, Shenoy M, Mushtaq I, Wood D

Journal of pediatric urology, 2020

30 participants

Abstract

PURPOSE: The authors present a case series of 30 male patients who presented with primary epispadias between 1989 and 2002 and looked at their long-term outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: (1) What procedures and operations did these patients require following their original surgery? (2) What were their outcomes as adults in terms of continence, cosmesis, and sexual function?

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Primary male epispadias patients who had gone through transition into Adolescent and Adult Urology services were identified retrospectively from electronic patient records.

RESULTS: The authors identified 30 male patients with a median follow-up of 18.5 years. Twenty-four had penopubic epispadias, and six had penile epispadias. All initial surgery took place between 9 and 48 months. Twenty-eight patients needed further surgery over the follow-up period, 26 had surgery for continence, and 12 required revision surgery. At follow-up, 15 patients were continent voiding per urethra, nine patients reported stress leakage with volitional urethral voiding, six patients were using a Mitrofanoff to void, and four of these had an ileocystoplasty. Nineteen patients had documentation on their feelings toward cosmetic outcome; 17 expressed concern. Twenty-one patients had documentation about sexual function; 20 had normal erections with six reporting chordee and nine reporting retrograde ejaculation. No patients were recorded to have fathered any children.

DISCUSSION: There are only a few published studies…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 30 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free