Characterization and outcomes of urethroplasty for hypospadias-associated urethral strictures in adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Urethral stricture is one of the most commonly encountered complications after hypospadias repair but remains poorly described. The aim of this study is to better characterize hypospadias-associated urethral strictures (HAUS) and treatment outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 84 patients who underwent urethroplasty (UP) for HAUS from 2003-2017. Patients were characterized with regard to demographics, stricture length, location, concurrent pathology, previous surgery, type of urethroplasty, 90-day complications, and surgical success defined as the absence of stricture on cystoscopy. Univariate and survival multivariate analysis was performed. RESULTS: Overall success was 88.1% at a mean followup of 19 months, with a 90-day complication rate of 9.5%, a 21.4% rate of urethrocutaneous fistula requiring a mean of 1.4 surgeries. Patients were categorized into one of four groups based on stricture length, location, and number of previous procedures: group 1 (66.7%) - previous failed hypospadias repair (HR) with stricture involving the entire repair; group 2 (7.1%) - "junctional stricture" at the junction of the "neourethra" and native urethra; group 3 (11.9%) - isolated bulbar stricture outside the repaired urethra; group 4 (14.3%) - urethral stricture in untreated hypospadias. Despite differing by technique (p<0.0001), stricture length (p=0.02), location (p<0.001), and number of previous repairs (p<0.001), groups did not significantly differ by success (p=0.82), complications (p=0.16), or urethrocutaneous fistula (p=0.19), whereas individual techniques did. CONCLUSIONS: UP for HAUS is often successful but patients frequently require more than one operation and have a significant risk of associated complications. Despite a broad spectrum of presentation, patients can often be categorized into one of four groups, which can help direct decision-making and obtain similar outcomes regardless of baseline differences.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".