Scholarlink

Introduction and Hypothesis <p>This study is aimed at comparing success rate, maximum flow rate (Q<sub>max</sub>), and post-void residual volume (PVR) between the buccal mucosal graft (BMG) and vaginal wall graft (VWG) through a meta-analysis of studies commonly performed by urogynecologists.</p> Methods <p>A systematic review was performed in April 2024, including retrospective, prospective, and comparative studies excluding duplicates, review, editorial comments, case reports, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and therapeutic indications. Heterogeneity in the meta-analysis was assessed using I<sup>2</sup> statistics.</p> Results <p>The meta-analysis incorporated a quantitative assessment of 18 original articles. The studies in meta-analysis evaluated various parameters, including Q<sub>max</sub>, PVR, and success rates of surgical outcomes. The I<sup>2</sup> statistics indicated no heterogeneity in Q<sub>max</sub> and success rates between BMG and VWG, both with I<sup>2</sup> = 0% and high heterogeneity for PVR values (I<sup>2</sup> &gt; 50%). According to the results, Q<sub>max</sub> values were 23.266 for BMG and 24.945 for VWG, PVR values were 14.651 for BMG and 23.009 for VWG, and success rates were 86.2% for BMG and 89.8% for VWG. A definition of success across the studies was established by achieving Q<sub>max</sub> &gt; 15&#xa0;ml/s at 3&#xa0;months, a PVR &lt; 30&#xa0;ml, and an improvement in the American Urological Association symptom scores.</p> Conclusions <p>Meta-analysis indicates no significant differences between VWG and BMG regarding Q<sub>max</sub>, PVR, and the overall success rate of surgical outcomes. Both BMG and VWG graft options demonstrate effectiveness in female urethroplasty. Graft choice should be based on graft availability and feasibility, patient characteristics, and the surgeon’s preference and expertise.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Buccal versus Vaginal Graft Urethroplasty in Female Urethral Stricture: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年6月12日

查看全文
  • Lalit Kumar,
  • Anuja Thakur,
  • Sakshi Agarwal,
  • Mahesh Khairnar,
  • Sameer Trivedi,
  • Satya Narain Shankhwar

摘要

Introduction and Hypothesis

This study is aimed at comparing success rate, maximum flow rate (Qmax), and post-void residual volume (PVR) between the buccal mucosal graft (BMG) and vaginal wall graft (VWG) through a meta-analysis of studies commonly performed by urogynecologists.

Methods

A systematic review was performed in April 2024, including retrospective, prospective, and comparative studies excluding duplicates, review, editorial comments, case reports, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and therapeutic indications. Heterogeneity in the meta-analysis was assessed using I2 statistics.

Results

The meta-analysis incorporated a quantitative assessment of 18 original articles. The studies in meta-analysis evaluated various parameters, including Qmax, PVR, and success rates of surgical outcomes. The I2 statistics indicated no heterogeneity in Qmax and success rates between BMG and VWG, both with I2 = 0% and high heterogeneity for PVR values (I2 > 50%). According to the results, Qmax values were 23.266 for BMG and 24.945 for VWG, PVR values were 14.651 for BMG and 23.009 for VWG, and success rates were 86.2% for BMG and 89.8% for VWG. A definition of success across the studies was established by achieving Qmax > 15 ml/s at 3 months, a PVR < 30 ml, and an improvement in the American Urological Association symptom scores.

Conclusions

Meta-analysis indicates no significant differences between VWG and BMG regarding Qmax, PVR, and the overall success rate of surgical outcomes. Both BMG and VWG graft options demonstrate effectiveness in female urethroplasty. Graft choice should be based on graft availability and feasibility, patient characteristics, and the surgeon’s preference and expertise.