Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 2, 2025
Vessel-sparing Excision and Primary Anastomosis
Published on: January 7, 2019
Posterior Urethral Reconstruction at the Time of Rectourethral Fistula Repair: Technique and Outcomes
Roger K Khouri1, João Pedro Emrich Accioly2, Molly E DeWitt-Foy2
1Center for Genitourinary Reconstruction, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Northwell Health, The Smith Institute for Urology, New Hyde Park, NY.
Objective:
To assess the impact of posterior urethral stenosis or defect on outcomes following rectourethral fistula (RUF) repair, we present a cohort of 23 men who underwent posterior urethroplasty concurrent with RUF repair.
Methods:
We identified 130 men who underwent RUF repair at our institution between 2003 and 2021. Of these, 23 (18%) underwent simultaneous posterior urethroplasty. Fifteen men received prior radiation for prostate cancer. Of the 8 men who were not radiated, 4 had a history of radical prostatectomy, 2 pelvic trauma, and 3 inflammatory bowel disease. All 23 men underwent fecal diversion prior to surgery (median, 6 months preoperatively), and 20 men suprapubic catheter placement (median, 5.5 months preoperatively).
Results:
RUF repair was performed via perineal approach in 22 cases (96%) and prone Kraske position in 1 (4%). Intraoperatively, 20 men (87%) had urethral stenosis, and 3 (13%) had significant urethral defects due to cavitation and tissue loss. There was stenosis/stricture involving the prostatomembranous urethra in 18 cases (78%) and vesicourethral anastomosis in 5 (22%). Urethroplasty was performed with anastomotic repair in 18 patients (78%) and using a buccal mucosal graft in 5 (22%). Gracilis flap interposition was performed in 21 cases (91%). At a median follow-up of 55.7 months (interquartile range (IQR), 23-82 months), 20 men (87%) had successful RUF closure, with 3 patients experiencing RUF recurrence requiring further surgery. Fourteen men (61%) reported postoperative urinary incontinence, with 7 (30%) ultimately undergoing artificial urinary sphincter placement. There were no isolated stricture recurrences requiring instrumentation.
Conclusion:
Posterior urethral stenosis associated with RUF complicates an already challenging problem. However, most of these patients can be successfully treated concurrent with RUF repair. This series demonstrates that patients with RUF should not be ruled out for restorative reconstructive surgery based on the presence of posterior urethral stenosis or defect.
