Does the suturing technique (barbed continuous versus conventional interrupted) impact the outcome of anastomotic urethroplasty?

Purpose: To evaluate and compare continuous suture (CS) and interrupted suture (IS) techniques applied in excision and primary anastomosis (EPA) urethroplasty in terms of surgical success and complication rates.
Methods: A retrospective evaluation was conducted on patients with bulbar urethral strictures measuring ≤ 2.5 cm who underwent EPA between April 2020 and December 2022. Patients with a history of urethral reconstruction, multiple strictures, a history of pelvic radiotherapy, a diagnosis of Lichen sclerosis, a history of surgery due to congenital penile curvature or Peyronie's disease, and a follow-up period of less than 12 months were excluded. The patients were divided into two groups according to the suture technique used (CS or IS), and the groups were compared for demographic and perioperative data.
Results: A total of 97 patients (CS n = 52, IS n = 55) were included in the sample. The mean age of the entire patient group was calculated to be 56.2 years and the mean stricture length was 19.3 mm. Operation time and postoperative catheter time were shorter in the CS group (94.7 ± 7.3 vs. 117.2 ± 5.7 min and 9.9 ± 1.6 vs. 15.8 ± 1.9 min, p < 0.001, respectively). The groups were similar regarding anatomical success, stress urinary incontinence, penile numbness, curvature, and postoperative infection (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: No significant difference was observed in terms of success or complications between the CS and IS techniques employed during EPA urethroplasty. However, in addition to reducing the operation time, the CS technique offers the advantage of safely removing the urethral catheter earlier.
Competing Interests: Declarations. Conflict of interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Ethical approval: The study was approved by Ethics Committee of Basaksehir Cam and Sakura City Hospital (decision number: 2024.02.131). Informed consent: An informed consent was obtained from all the patients. Consent for publication: The results of the study were not published in full or in part in the form of abstracts.
(© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.)