الفهرس 
Introduction And Aim Of The WorkOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 126 |  |  |
| | | from | 126 | | |
Abstract
The aim of the study is to diagnose the degree of urethral stricture in order to compare the results of surgical versus endoscopic treatment of urethral stricture.
In conclusion:
Bilharzial ureteral stricture is different completely in its pathology from other forms of ureteral stricture, so, the experience in endoscopic dilatation of non bilharzial stricture show good results and improvement than other bilharzial one.
The major advantages of endoscopic treatment of ureteral stricture over open surgery have been firmly established in the terms of lower morbidity, better patients’ tolerance and significantly reduced recovery and convalescence time.
The selection of patients and procedure used is important for strictures of less than 2cm, not so tight, not longstanding, and not recurrent and not in middle 1/3 of the ureter, endoscopic management can be utilized.
On the other hand, recurrent strictures, longstanding or long segment strictures are better treated surgically.
Other bilharzial lesions of the bladder must not be overlooked and concomitantly management in endoscopic procedures can be managed concomitantly in surgical operations.
On the other hand, endoscopic procedures need not only the criteria of the stricture but also the experience of the urologist and the availability of equipments determine the success of the procedure.