Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of the buccal mucosa and lingual mucosa used in children who received multiple failed hypospadias surgeries.
Method: We conducted a retrospective study of 62 children who received buccal or lingual mucosa graft urethroplasty in our hospital between 2012 and 2015. The ages ranged from 3.5-11 y. All cases included multiple failed hypospadias procedures, and the subjects received previous operations 2-3 times. All patients underwent one-stage operations. Thirty-three cases were treated with lingual mucosa grafts. The patient ages ranged from 3.5 to 11 y (median 7.5 y), and they had previous operations 2-3 times (mean 2.8±0.7). Grafts ranged from lengths of 2-6 cm (mean 5.1±0.46 cm) and widths of 0.5-1.5 cm (mean 1.2± 0.16 cm). Our follow-up was 5 to 12 m (mean 8.3±1.2 m). Twenty-nine cases were treated with buccal mucosa grafts. The patient ages ranged from 4 to 9.2 y (median 7.0 y), and they had previous operations 2-3 times (mean 2.5±0.2). Grafts ranged from lengths of 2-5.3 cm (mean 4.9± 0.28 cm) and widths of 0.5-1.5 cm (mean 1.0±0.11 cm). Our follow-up was 5 to 12 m (mean 7.9±0.5 m). The results were tested with SPSS 18.0. The rates of complications were compared by a chi-square test, and pre-operative conditions were compared by t test.
Results: For the outcomes of the two groups, there was no significant difference between the groups in terms of age, preoperative surgery time, and the length and width of the grafts (p>0.05). For the lingual mucosa graft group, fistula: 2/33 (6.0%), stricture: 1/33(3.0%), ventral curvature: 2/33(6.0%), complications: 5/33(15.0%), success rate: 28/33(84.8%), Hose score: 14.34±0.95, peak flow: 6.5 ml/s-12.0 ml/s, and mean peak flow: 9.3±0.4 ml/s. For the buccal mucosa graft group, fistula: 2/29(6.8%), stricture: 2/29(6.8%), ventral curvature: 1/29 (3.4%), complication rate: 5/29(17.0%), success rate: 24/29 (83.0%), Hose score: 14.28±1.03, peak flow: 6.5 ml/s-12.0 ml/s, and mean peak flow: 9.2±0.2 ml/s. There were no differences between the two groups for overall success, complication rates, peak flow, and the Hose scores(P>0.05).
Conclusion: The lingual mucosal graft and the buccal mucosa graft both achieved good outcomes, and the lingual mucosa graft made up for the shortcomings of the buccal mucosa graft, which provided a reliable way to treat the multiple failed hypospadias surgeries in pre-pubertal boys.