A novel application of the lotus petal flap in high-risk perineal urethrostomy: principles and outcomes

Main Article Content

Daniel J Reilly
Eric K Sham
Justin BL Chee
Ajay Chauhan

Keywords

urethra, urologic surgical procedures male, penis, perineum

Abstract

Introduction: Perineal urethrostomy is a valuable technique in the management of complex anterior urethral strictures, as well as following penectomy or urethrectomy. Traditional techniques that employ perineal or scrotal skin flaps have documented failure rates of up to 30%. Current techniques for salvage have only modest success, leaving patients few options other than permanent suprapubic catheter or cystectomy and ileal conduit formation.

Results: We present a new method of perineal urethrostomy using perforator-based lotus petal flaps in cases which were high risk or unsuitable for traditional perineal urethrostomy techniques, or where traditional strategies had failed. All patients demonstrated continent voiding at a minimum of 22 months follow-up, with patency confirmed by flexible cystoscopy. No complications were encountered.

Conclusion: Utilisation of lotus petal flaps in high-risk cases of perineal urethrostomy will lead to significant improvements in patient outcomes. The availability of larger amounts of soft tissue coverage will obviate the need for compromise on either resection of involved urethra, or calibre and inset of urethrostomy. This will subsequently minimise the rates of failure, reduce the requirement for urinary diversion procedures and lead to improved quality of life.

Abstract 511 | PDF Downloads 452 HTML Downloads 171

References

1. Parker DC, Morey AF, Simhan J. 7-flap perineal urethrostomy. Transl Androl Urol. 2015; 4(1): 51-55.
2. Myers JB, McAninch JW. Perineal urethrostomy. BJU Int. 2011; 107: 856-865. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10139.x PMid:21355988
3. Barbagli G, De Angelis M, Romano G, Lazzeri M. Clinical outcome and qualityof life assessment in patients treated with perineal urethrostomy for anterior urethral stricture disease. J Urol. 2009; 182: 548-557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.04.012 PMid:19524945
4. Johanson B. The reconstruction in stenosis of the male urethra (German). Z Urol. 1953; 46: 361-375.
5. Blandy JP, Singh M, Tresidder GC. Urethroplasty by scrotal flap for long urethral strictures. Br J Urol. 1968; 40: 261-267. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.1968.tb09886.x PMid:4872409
6. Lumen N, Beysens M, Van Praet C, et al. Perineal urethrostomy: Surgical and functional evaluation of two techniques. BioMed Res Int. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/365715
7. Myers JB, Porten SP, McAninch JW. The outcomes of perineal urethrostomy with preservation of the dorsal urethral plate and urethral blood supply. Urol. 2011; 77(5): 1223-1227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2010.10.041 PMid:21215434
8. Kulkarni S, Barbagli G, Kirpekar D, Mirri F, Lazzeri M. Lichen sclerosus of the male genitalia and urethra: surgical options and results in a multicenter international experience with 215 patients. Eur Urol. 2009; 55: 945-954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2008.07.046 PMid:18691809
9. Lumen N, Houtmeyers P, Monstrey S, Spinoit A-F, Oosterlinck W, Hoebeke P. Revision of perineal urethrostomy using a meshed split-thickness skin graft. Case Rep Nephrol Urol. 2014; 4: 12-17. https://doi.org/10.1159/000358556 PMid:24575117 PMCid:PMC3934782
10. French D, Hudak SJ, Morey AF. The '7-flap' perineal urethrostomy. Urol. 2011; 77(6): 1487-1490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2010.10.053 PMid:21256550
11. Palminteri E, Lazzeri M, Guazzoni G, Turini D, Barbagli G. New 2 stage buccal mucosa graft urethroplasty. J Urol. 2002; 167: 130-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(05)65397-9
12. Kamat N. Perineal urethrostomy stenosis repair with buccal mucosa: description of technique and report of four cases. Urol. 2008; 72(5): 1153-1155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2008.06.072 PMid:18789512
13. Salgado CJ, Chim H, Skowronski PP, Oeltjen JO, Rodriguez M, Mardini S. Reconstruction of acquired defects of the vagina and perineum. Semin Plast Surg. 2011; 25(2): 155-162. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1281485 PMid:22547973 PMCid:PMC3312143
14. Kim JT, Ho SY, Hwang JH, Lee JH. Perineal perforator-based island flaps: the next frontier in perineal reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014; 133(5): 683e-687e. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000000146
15. Yii NW, Niranjan NS. Lotus petal flaps in vulvo-vaginal reconstruction. Br J Plast Surg. 1996; 49: 547-554. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-1226(96)90132-0
16. Niranjan NS. Perforator flaps for perineal reconstructions. Semin Plast Surg. 2006; 20(2): 133-143. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2006-941721 PMCid:PMC2884778
17. Payne CE, Williams AM, Hart NB. Lotus petal flaps for scrotal reconstruction combined with integra resurfacing of the penis and anterior abdominal wall following necrotising fasciitis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2009; 62: 393-397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2007.09.015 PMid:17974514
18. Warrier SK, Kimble FW, Blomfield P. Refinements in the lotus petal flap repair of the vulvo-perineum. ANZ J Surg. 2004; 74: 684-688. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-1433.2004.03119.x PMid:15315573
19. Monstrey S, Blondeel P, Van Landuyt K, Verpaele A, Tonnard P, Matton G. The versatility of the pudendal thigh fasciocutaneous flap used as an island flap. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001; 107(3): 719-725. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-200103000-00011 PMid:11304597