Search In this Thesis
   Search In this Thesis  
العنوان
One Stage versus Staged Repair in Management of Proximal Hypospadias /
المؤلف
Abo El-Souad, Samir Mimi.
هيئة الاعداد
باحث / سمير ميمي ابو السعود
مشرف / احمد حسن نوفل
مشرف / عصام عبد العزيز الحلبي
مشرف / هشام المحمدي غريب
مشرف / محمد عوض منصور
الموضوع
Surgery.
تاريخ النشر
2023.
عدد الصفحات
p 128. :
اللغة
الإنجليزية
الدرجة
الدكتوراه
التخصص
جراحة
تاريخ الإجازة
26/3/2023
مكان الإجازة
جامعة طنطا - كلية الطب - الجراحة العامة
الفهرس
Only 14 pages are availabe for public view

from 166

from 166

Abstract

Hypospadias is the most common congenital anomaly of male external genitalia. The incidence is approximately 1 in 250 live male births. There‗s no definitive cause for hypospadias. There are many factors that may account for it as testosterone deficiency, maternal use of oral contraceptives during early pregnancy, maternal exposure to antiepileptic drugs, intrauterine growth retardation and low birth weight, twins, and advanced maternal age. Hypospadias can be classified according to location of the meatus into proximal, middle and distal hypospadias. The best approach for repairing proximal penile hypospadias is a matter of debate. The challenge is to correct different degrees of penile curvature in children and preserving erectile function and reconstructing the urethra. Surgeons are proponents of either single or multi-staged techniques for reconstruction of proximal hypospadias. In this study, 20 patients diagnosed with proximal hypospadias were classified into two groups, group I included 10 patients were operated using modified Koyanagi technique and group II included 10 patients were operated using staged repair technique. In group I, 2 patients (20%) were complicated by fistula, 1 (10%) patients suffered from metal stenosis, 1 (10%) patients suffered from metal retraction (regression). In group II, urethrocutoneous fistula was reported in one patient (10%) and metal retraction in one patient (10%). The complication rate was considerably 4 of 10 patients (40%) in group I and 2 of 10 patients (20%) in group II (40% versus 20%).