Skip to main content

Clinical Presentation and Diagnostic Evaluation of Male Urethral Stricture

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Textbook of Male Genitourethral Reconstruction

Abstract

Primary diagnosis of urethral strictures mostly relies on the presence of certain risk factors in the context of bladder outlet obstruction, that lead to further investigation. Findings on physical examination, patient-reported assessments, uroflowmetry, and post-void residual determination can raise suspicion of a stricture, but are not sufficient for diagnostic confirmation. Definitive diagnosis of urethral narrowing is based on cystoscopy, while staging, characteristics determination, and surgical planning is typically made using retrograde/voiding urethrogram. Evidence supporting the use of urethral ultrasound for anterior strictures has been growing considerably and may be even considered as surrogate for urethrogram in some specific settings. More recently, both urethral magnetic resonance, along with urethral computed tomography have proven to be helpful for complex cases of pelvic fracture urethral injuries, fistulas, and posterior urethral strictures.

Regarding follow-up studies after surgical repair, it has been recommended to use periodical patient-reported outcome measurements including not only voiding features, but also sexual, overall satisfaction, and quality of life fields, since, besides voiding function, urethroplasty may impact on several aspects of patients’ daily life. Currently, a comprehensive tool incorporating all these aspects does not exist yet. Additionally, uroflowmetry and post-void residual measurement should be performed on a regular basis. Nonetheless, cystoscopic evaluation should be done around 3 months and between 12 and 18 months postoperatively, because some recurrences may not be detected by the above-mentioned assessments. If a stricture recurrence is detected, then urethrogram is mandatory for staging and further surgical planning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Blandy JP. Urethral stricture. Postgred Med J. 1980;56:383–418.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Cunningham J. The diagnosis of stricture of the urethra by Roentgen rays. Trans Am Assoc Genitourin Surg. 1910;5:369–71.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Moran ME, Moll FH. The history of technologic advancements in urology [Internet]. Patel SR, Moran ME, Nakada SY, editors. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018. p. 3–20. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-61691-9

  4. Rourke K, Hickle J. The clinical spectrum of the presenting signs and symptoms of anterior urethral stricture: Detailed analysis of a single institutional cohort. Urology [Internet]. Elsevier; 2012;79(5):1163–7. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2012.01.044.

  5. Rourke K. The epidemiology, clinical presentation, and economic burden of urethral stricture. In: Brandes SB, Morey AF, editors. New York: Humana Press; 2014 [cited 2018 Jul 20]. p. 83–93. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-1-4614-7708-2_7

  6. Mundy AR, Andrich DE. Urethral strictures. BJU Int. 2011;107(1):6–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Palminteri E, Berdondini E, Verze P, De Nunzio C, Vitarelli A, Carmignani L. Contemporary urethral stricture characteristics in the developed world. Urology [Internet]. Elsevier; 2013;81(1):191–6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2012.08.062.

  8. Wessells H, Angermeier KW, Elliott S, Gonzalez CM, Kodama R, Peterson AC, et al. Male urethral stricture: American urological association guideline. J Urol [Internet]. Elsevier; 2017 [cited 2018 Jul 23];197(1):182–90. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.07.087.

  9. Bayne DB, Gaither TW, Awad MA, Murphy GP, Osterberg EC, Breyer BN. Guidelines of guidelines: a review of urethral stricture evaluation, management, and follow-up. Transl Androl Urol [Internet]. 2017;6(2):288–94. Available from: http://tau.amegroups.com/article/view/14057/14810

  10. Jordan G, Chapple C, Heyns C. Proceedings of International Consultation on Urologic Diseases: Urethral Strictures, International Consultation on Urethral Strictures, in conjunction with the Société Internationale d’Urologie (SIU) World Meeting, 13–16 October 2010, Marrakech, Morocco. Urology. 2014;83(3 Suppl):S1–73.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Nuss GR, Granieri MA, Zhao LC, Thum DJ, Gonzalez CM. Presenting symptoms of anterior urethral stricture disease: a disease specific, patient reported questionnaire to measure outcomes. J Urol [Internet] Elsevier; 2012;187(2):559–62. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.10.043.

  12. Plante M, Corcos J, Gregoire I, Belanger MF, Brock G, Rossingol M. The international prostate symptom score: physician versus self-administration in the quantification of symptomatology. Urology [Internet]. 1996 [cited 2018 Jul 26];47(3):326–8. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8633396

  13. Arocho R, Kason NM, Colón B, McMillan CA. Translation and validation of the American urological association symptom index into Spanish. Clin Ther [Internet]. [cited 2018 Jul 26];17(4):777–85. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8565040

  14. Grégoire JP, Moisan J, Labrecque M, Cusan L, Diamond P. [Validation of a French adaptation of the international prostatic symptom score]. Prog Urol [Internet]. 1996 [cited 2018 Jul 26];6(2):240–9. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8777417

  15. Moore C, Kogan BA, Parekh A. Impact of urinary incontinence on self-concept in children with spina bifida. J Urol. 2004;171(4):1659–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Barry MJ, Fowler FJ, Chang Y, Liss CL, Wilson H, Stek M. The American urological association symptom index: does mode of administration affect its psychometric properties? J Urol [Internet]. 1995 [cited 2018 Jul 26];154(3):1056–9. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7543597

  17. Netto Júnior NR, de Lima ML. The influence of patient education level on the international prostatic symptom score. J Urol [Internet]. 1995 [cited 2018 Jul 26];154(1):97–9. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7539870

  18. Morey AF, McAninch JW, Duckett CP, Rogers RS. American urological association symptom index in the assessment of urethroplasty outcomes. J Urol [Internet]. 1998 [cited 2018 Jul 23];159(4):1192–4. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9507830

  19. Yalla S V, Sullivan MP, Lecamwasam HS, DuBeau CE, Vickers MA, Cravalho EG. Correlation of American urological association symptom index with obstructive and nonobstructive prostatism. J Urol [Internet]. 1995 [cited 2018 Jul 26];153(3 Pt 1):674–9; discussion 679–80. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7532231

  20. Chancellor MB, Rivas DA, Keeley FX, Lotfi MA, Gomella LG. Similarity of the American urological association symptom index among men with benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH), urethral obstruction not due to BPH and detrusor hyperreflexia without outlet obstruction. Br J Urol [Internet]. 1994 [cited 2018 Jul 26];74(2):200–3. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7522872

  21. Roberts RO, Jacobsen SJ, Jacobson DJ, Reilly WT, Talley NJ, Lieber MM. Natural history of prostatism: high American urological association symptom scores among community-dwelling men and women with urinary incontinence. Urology [Internet]. 1998 [cited 2018 Jul 26];51(2):213–9. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9495700

  22. Meeks JJ, Erickson BA, Granieri MA, Gonzalez CM. Stricture recurrence after urethroplasty: A systematic review. J Urol [Internet]. Elsevier; 2009 [cited 2018 Jul 17];182(4 SUPPL.):1266–70. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022534709014967

  23. Heyns CF, Marais DC. Prospective evaluation of the American urological association symptom index and peak urinary flow rate for the followup of men with known urethral stricture disease. J Urol [Internet]. 2002 [cited 2018 Jul 17];168(5):2051–4. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12394706

  24. Tam CA, Voelzke BB, Elliott SP, Myers JB, McClung CD, Vanni AJ, et al. Critical analysis of the use of uroflowmetry for urethral stricture disease surveillance. Urology [Internet]. NIH Public Access; 2016 [cited 2018 Jul 23];91:197–202. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26873640

  25. Tam CA, Elliott SP, Voelzke BB, Myers JB, Vanni AJ, Breyer BN, et al. The international prostate symptom score (IPSS) is an inadequate tool to screen for urethral stricture recurrence after anterior urethroplasty. Urology [Internet] 2016 [cited 2018 Jul 17];95:197–201. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0090429516300942

  26. Erickson BA, Elliott SP, Voelzke BB, Myers JB, Broghammer JA, Smith TG, et al. Multi-institutional 1-year bulbar urethroplasty outcomes using a standardized prospective cystoscopic follow-up protocol. Urology. 2014;84(1):213–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Jackson MJ, N’Dow J, Pickard R. The importance of patient-reported outcome measures in reconstructive urology. Curr Opin Urol. 2010;20(6):495–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kessler TM, Fisch M, Heitz M, Olianas R, Schreiter F. Patient satisfaction with the outcome of surgery for urethral stricture. J Urol. 2002;167(6):2507–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bertrand LA, Voelzke BB, Elliott SP, Myers JB, Breyer BN, Vanni AJ, et al. Measuring and predicting patient dissatisfaction after anterior urethroplasty using patient reported outcomes measures. J Urol [Internet]. Elsevier; 2016 [cited 2018 Aug 7];196(2):453–61. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022534716003517

  30. Maciejewski CC, Haines T, Rourke KF. Chordee and penile shortening rather than voiding function are associated with patient dissatisfaction after Urethroplasty. Urology [Internet] Elsevier; 2017;103:234–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2016.12.047.

  31. Jackson MJ, Sciberras J, Mangera A, Brett A, Watkin N, N’Dow JMO, et al. Defining a patient-reported outcome measure for urethral stricture surgery. Eur Urol. 2011;60(1):60–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Breyer BN, Edwards TC, Patrick DL, Voelzke BB. Comprehensive qualitative assessment of urethral stricture disease: toward the development of a patient centered outcome measure. J Urol [Internet]. Elsevier; 2017;198(5):1113–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.05.077.

  33. Coursey JW, Morey AF, McAninch JW, Summerton DJ, Secrest C, White P, et al. Erectile function after anterior urethroplasty. J Urol. 2001;166(6):2273–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. MacDiarmid SA, Goodson TC, Holmes TM, Martin PR, Doyle RB. An assessment of the comprehension of the American urological association symptom index. J Urol [Internet]. 1998 [cited 2018 Jul 30];159(3):873–4. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9474172

  35. Johnson TV., Abbasi A, Ehrlich SS, Kleris RS, Schoenberg ED, Owen-Smith A, et al. Patient misunderstanding of the individual questions of the American urological association symptom score. J Urol [Internet]. 2008 [cited 2018 Jul 30];179(6):2291–5. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022534708002851

  36. Van Der Walt CLE, Heyns CF, Groeneveld AE, Edlin RS, Van Vuuren SPJ. Prospective comparison of a new visual prostate symptom score versus the international prostate symptom score in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. Urology [Internet]. Elsevier; 2011;78(1):17–20. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.01.065.

  37. Wessels SG, Heyns CF. Prospective evaluation of a new visual prostate symptom score, the international prostate symptom score, and uroflowmetry in men with urethral stricture disease. Urology [Internet]. Elsevier; 2014;83(1):220–4. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.08.058.

  38. Yucel S, Baskin LS. Neuroanatomy of the male urethra and perineum. BJU Int. 2003;92(6):624–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Yucel S, Baskin LS. Identification of communicating branches among the dorsal, perineal and cavernous nerves of the penis. J Urol. 2003;170(1):153–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Dalpiaz O, Mitterberger M, Kerschbaumer A, Pinggera GM, Bartsch G, Strasser H. Anatomical approach for surgery of the male posterior urethra. BJU Int. 2008;102(10):1448–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Dogra PN, Singh P, Nayyar R, Yadav S. Sexual dysfunction after urethroplasty. Urol Clin North Am [Internet]. Elsevier; 2017;44(1):49–56. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2016.08.013.

  42. Erickson BA, Granieri MA, Meeks JJ, Cashy JP, Gonzalez CM. Prospective analysis of erectile dysfunction after anterior urethroplasty: incidence and recovery of function. J Urol [Internet]. Elsevier; 2010;183(2):657–61. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.10.017.

  43. Anger JT, Sherman ND, Webster GD. The effect of bulbar urethroplasty on erectile function. J Urol. 2007;178(3):1009–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Erickson BA, Wysock JS, McVary KT, Gonzalez CM. Erectile function, sexual drive, and ejaculatory function after reconstructive surgery for anterior urethral stricture disease. BJU Int. 2007;99(3):607–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Blaschko SD, Sanford MT, Cinman NM, McAninch JW, Breyer BN. De novo erectile dysfunction after anterior urethroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int. 2013;112(5):655–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Sachin D, ChikkaMoga Siddaiah M, Vilvapathy Senguttuvan K, Chandrashekar Sidaramappa R, Ramaiah K. Incidence of De novo erectile dysfunction after Urethroplasty: a prospective observational study. World J Mens Health. 2017;35(2):94–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Shenfeld OZ, Kiselgorf D, Gofrit ON, Verstandig AG, Landau EH, Pode D. The incidence and causes of erectile dysfunction after pelvic fractures associated with posterior urethral disruption. J Urol [Internet]. 2003 [cited 2018 Aug 29];169(6):2173–2176. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022534705635562

  48. Anger JT, Sherman ND, Dielubanza E, Webster GD. Erectile function after posterior urethroplasty for pelvic fracture-urethral distraction defect injuries. BJU Int. 2009;104(8):1126–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Koraitim MM. Predictors of erectile dysfunction post pelvic fracture urethral injuries: a multivariate analysis. Urology [Internet]. Elsevier; 2013;81(5):1081–5. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2012.12.040.

  50. Fu Q, Zhang J, Sa YL, Jin SB, Xu YM. Recurrence and complications after transperineal bulboprostatic anastomosis for posterior urethral strictures resulting from pelvic fracture: a retrospective study from a urethral referral Centre. BJU Int. 2013;112(4):358–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Blaschko SD, Sanford MT, Schlomer BJ, Alwaal A, Yang G, Villalta JD, et al. The incidence of erectile dysfunction after pelvic fracture urethral injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arab J Urol [internet]. Arab association of Urology; 2015;13(1):68–74. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2014.09.004.

  52. Wright JL, Nathens AB, Rivara FP, MacKenzie EJ, Wessells H. Specific fracture configurations predict sexual and excretory dysfunction in men and women 1 year after pelvic fracture. J Urol [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2018 Aug 29];176(4):1540–5. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022534706014200

  53. Feng C, Xu YM, Barbagli G, Lazzeri M, Tang CY, Fu Q, et al. The relationship between erectile dysfunction and open urethroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sex Med. 2013;10(8):2060–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Pratap A, Agrawal CS, Pandit RK, Sapkota G, Anchal N. Factors contributing to a successful outcome of combined abdominal Transpubic perineal Urethroplasty for complex posterior urethral disruptions. J Urol [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2018 Aug 29];176(6):2514–2517. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022534706019641

  55. KORAITIM MM. On the art of anastomotic posterior urethroplasty: a 27-year experience. J Urol [Internet]. 2005 [cited 2018 Aug 29];173(1):135–139. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022534705607975

  56. Morey AF, McAninch JW. Reconstruction of posterior urethral disruption injuries: outcome analysis in 82 patients. J Urol [Internet]. 1997 [cited 2018 Aug 29];157(2):506–510. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8996343

  57. Alwaal A, Breyer BN, Lue TF. Normal male sexual function: emphasis on orgasm and ejaculation. Fertil Steril [Internet] Elsevier; 2015;104(5):1051–60. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.08.033.

  58. Yang CC, Bradley WE. Reflex innervation of the bulbocavernosus muscle. BJU Int. 2000;85(7):857–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Kaluzny A, Gibas A, Matuszewski M. Ejaculatory disorders in men with urethral stricture and impact of urethroplasty on the ejaculatory function: a systematic review. J Sex Med [Internet]. Elsevier; 2018;15(7):974–81. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.05.005.

  60. Erickson BA, Breyer BN, McAninch JW. Changes in uroflowmetry maximum flow rates after urethral reconstructive surgery as a means to predict for stricture recurrence. J Urol [Internet]. Elsevier; 2011;186(5):1934–7. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.07.010.

  61. Anger JT, Sherman ND, Webster GD. Ejaculatory profiles and fertility in men after posterior urethroplasty for pelvic fracture-urethral distraction defect injuries. BJU Int [Internet] 2008 [cited 2018 Aug 30];102(3):351–353. Available from: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.07657.x.

  62. El-Assmy A, Benhassan M, Harraz AM, Nabeeh A, Ibrahiem EHI. Ejaculatory function after anastomotic urethroplasty for pelvic fracture urethral injuries. Int Urol Nephrol [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Aug 8];47(3):497–501. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25655257

  63. Feneley MR, Dunsmuir WD, Pearce J, Kirby RS. Reproducibility of uroflow measurement: experience during a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of doxazosin in benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology [Internet]. 1996 [cited 2018 Sep 5];47(5):658–63. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8650862

  64. Nitti VW. Pressure flow urodynamic studies: the gold standard for diagnosing bladder outlet obstruction. Rev Urol [Internet] 2005;7 Suppl 6:S14–21. Available from: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1477621&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract

  65. Chancellor MB, Blaivas JG, Kaplan SA, Axelrod S. Bladder outlet obstruction versus impaired detrusor contractility: the role of outflow. J Urol [Internet]. 1991 Apr [cited 2018 Sep 5];145(4):810–812. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2005706

  66. Abrams P. Bladder outlet obstruction index, bladder contractility index and bladder voiding efficiency: three simple indices to define bladder voiding function. BJU Int [Internet]. 1999 [cited 2018 Sep 5];84(1):14–15. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10444116

  67. Lambert E, Denys M-A, Poelaert F, Everaert K, Lumen N. Validated uroflowmetry-based predictive model for the primary diagnosis of urethral stricture disease in men. Int J Urol [Internet] 2018 [cited 2018 Oct 25];25(9):1–7. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30021245.

  68. Angermeier KW, Rourke KF, Dubey D, Forsyth RJ, Gonzalez CM. SIU/ICUD consultation on urethral strictures: evaluation and follow-up. Urology [Internet]. Elsevier; 2014;83(3 Suppl.):S8–17. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.09.011.

  69. Erickson BA, Breyer BN, McAninch JW. The use of uroflowmetry to diagnose recurrent stricture after urethral reconstructive surgery. J Urol [Internet]. Elsevier; 2010 [cited 2018 Sep 7];184(5):1386–90. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2010.06.015.

  70. Erickson BA, Ghareeb GM. Definition of successful treatment and optimal follow-up after urethral reconstruction for urethral stricture disease. Urol Clin North Am [Internet]. Elsevier; 2017;44(1):1–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ucl.2016.08.001.

  71. Johnson T V., Abbasi A, Ehrlich SS, Kleris RS, Schoenberg ED, Owen-Smith A, et al. No title. J Urol [Internet] 2008 Jun [cited 2018 Jul 30];179(6):2291–2295. Available from: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022534708002851

  72. Choudhary S, Singh P, Sundar E, Kumar S, Sahai A. A comparison of sonourethrography and retrograde urethrography in evaluation of anterior urethral strictures. Clin Radiol. 2004;59(8):736–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Smith JC. Urethral resistance to micturition. Br J Urol [Internet] 1968 Apr [cited 2018 Sep 7];40(2):125–156. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5653005

  74. Goonesinghe SK, Hillary CJ, Nicholson TR, Osman NI, Chapple CR. Flexible cystourethroscopy in the follow-up of posturethroplasty patients and characterisation of recurrences. Eur Urol [internet]. European association of Urology; 2015;68(3):523–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.04.013.

  75. Lavoie C, Rourke KF. MP–6.3. Optimal preoperative staging of penile urethral stricture length: the critical role of pediatric cystoscopy. Can Urol Assoc J. 2018;12(6Suppl2):S96.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Yeung LL, Brandes SB. Urethroplasty practice and surveillance patterns: a survey of reconstructive urologists. Urology [Internet]. Elsevier; 2013;82(2):471–5. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.03.069.

  77. Zaid UB, Hawkins M, Wilson L, Ting J, Harris C, Alwaal A, et al. The cost of surveillance after Urethroplasty. Urology. 2015;85(5):1195–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Hart D, Wall BF. UK population dose from medical X-ray examinations. Eur J Radiol [Internet]. 2004. [cited 2018 Oct 9];50(3):285–291. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15145489

  79. Wood DN, Andrich DE, Greenwell TJ, Mundy AR. Standing the test of time: the long-term results of urethroplasty. World J Urol [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2018 Sep 14];24(3):250–254. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16508787

  80. Belsante MJ, Zhao LC, Hudak SJ, Lotan Y, Morey AF. Cost-effectiveness of risk stratified Followup after urethral reconstruction : a decision analysis. J Urol [Internet] Elsevier; 2013;190(4):1292–7. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2013.04.024.

  81. Mahmud SM, El KS, Rana AM, Zaidi Z. Is ascending urethrogram mandatory for all urethral strictures ? J Pak Med Assoc. 2008;58(8):429–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Peskar DB, Perovič AV. Comparison of radiographic and sonographic urethrography for assessing urethral strictures. Eur Radiol. 2004;14(1):137–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Koraitim MM. Assessment and management of an open bladder neck at posterior urethroplasty. Urology [Internet]. Elsevier; 2010;76(2):476–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2009.11.043.

  84. Bach P, Rourke K. Independently interpreted retrograde urethrography does not accurately diagnose and stage anterior urethral stricture: the importance of urologist-performed urethrography. Urology [Internet]. Elsevier; 2014;83(5):1190–3. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.12.063.

  85. Kulkarni S, Joshi P. Imaging in stricture urethra. In: Gulia R, Santucci R, Kulkarni SB, editors. Atlas of urethroplasty. 1st ed. New Delhi: JP Brothers Medical Publishers; 2014. p. 19–27.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  86. Maciejewski C, Rourke K. Imaging of urethral stricture disease. Transl Androl Urol [Internet] 2015;4(1):2–9. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4708283/pdf/tau-04-01-002.pdf

  87. McAninch JW, Laing FC, Jeffrey RB. Sonourethrography in the evaluation of urethral strictures: a preliminary report. J Urol [Internet]. 1988 [cited 2018 Sep 24];139(2):294–297. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3276926

  88. Merkle W, Wagner W. Sonography of the distal male urethra – a new diagnostic procedure for urethral strictures: results of a retrospective study. J Urol [Internet]. 1988 [cited 2018 Sep 24];140(6):1409–1411. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3057226

  89. Gupta S, Majumdar B, Tiwari A, Gupta RK, Kumar A, Gujral RB. Sonourethrography in the evaluation of anterior urethral strictures: correlation with radiographic urethrography. J Clin Ultrasound [Internet]. 1993 [cited 2018 Sep 24];21(4):231–239. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8478455

  90. Shaida N, Berman LH. Ultrasound of the male anterior urethra. Br J Radiol [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2018 Sep 24];85(special_issue_1):S94–101. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22674713

  91. Ravikumar BR, Tejus C, Madappa KM, Prashant D, Dhayanand GS. A comparative study of ascending urethrogram and sono-urethrogram in the evaluation of stricture urethra. Int Braz J Urol. 2015;41(2):388–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Tembhekar NG, Sonawane BD, Mashirkar A, Titare PU, Anand A, Rathod PB. Sonourethrographic assessment of urethral obstruction. J Evol Med Dent Sci [Internet] 2014;3(64):13971–13978. Available from: http://www.jemds.com/data_pdf/1_NarendraTembhekar---------shree.pdf

  93. Heidenreich A, Derschum W, Bonfig R, Wilbert DM. Ultrasound in the evaluation of urethral stricture disease: a prospective study in 175 patients. Br J Urol [Internet]. 1994 [cited 2018 Oct 4];74(1):93–98. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8044532

  94. Mitterberger M, Christian G, Pinggera GM, Bartsch G, Strasser H, Pallwein L, et al. Gray scale and color Doppler sonography with extended field of view technique for the diagnostic evaluation of anterior urethral strictures. J Urol. 2007;177(3):992–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Bryk DJ, Khurana K, Yamaguchi Y, Kozirovsky M, Telegrafi S, Zhao LC. Outpatient ultrasound urethrogram for assessment of anterior urethral stricture: early experience. Urology [Internet]. Elsevier; 2016;93:203–7. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2016.03.016.

  96. Oh MM, Jin MH, Sung DJ, Yoon DK, Kim JJ, Moon DG. Magnetic resonance urethrography to assess obliterative posterior urethral stricture: comparison to conventional retrograde urethrography with voiding cystourethrography. J Urol [Internet]. Elsevier; 2010;183(2):603–7. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.10.016.

  97. Osman Y, El-Ghar MA, Mansour O, Refaie H, El-Diasty T. Magnetic resonance urethrography in comparison to retrograde urethrography in diagnosis of male urethral strictures: is it clinically relevant? Eur Urol. 2006;50(3):587–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Gupta N, Dubey D, Mandhani A, Srivastava A, Kapoor R, Kumar A. Urethral stricture assessment: a prospective study evaluating urethral ultrasonography and conventional radiological studies. BJU Int. 2006;98(1):149–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Buckley JC, Wu AK, McAninch JW. Impact of urethral ultrasonography on decision-making in anterior urethroplasty. BJU Int. 2012;109(3):438–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Theisen KM, Kadow BT, Rusilko PJ. Three-dimensional imaging of urethral stricture disease and urethral pathology for operative planning. Curr Urol Rep [Internet]; 2016;17(8):1–7. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-016-0616-0.

  101. Chen L, Feng C, Lv XG, Fan HH, Joshi P, Barbagli G, et al. Three-dimensional computerized model based on the sonourethrogram: a novel technique to evaluate anterior urethral stricture. J Urol [Internet]. Elsevier. 2018;199(2):568–75. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.08.098.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Sung DJ, Kim YH, Cho SB, Oh YW, Lee NJ, Kim JH, et al. Obliterative urethral stricture: MR urethrography versus conventional retrograde urethrography with voiding cystourethrography. Radiology [Internet]. 2006;240(3):842–848. Available from: http://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.2403050590.

  103. Patil MB, Hannoun D, Reyblat P, Boyd SD. Total bladder and posterior urethral reconstruction: salvage technique for defunctionalized bladder with recalcitrant posterior urethral stenosis. J Urol [Internet]. Elsevier; 2015;193(5):1649–54. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.11.102.

  104. Dixon CM, Hricak H, McAninch JW. Magnetic resonance imaging of traumatic posterior urethral defects and pelvic crush injuries. J Urol [Internet]. 1992 [cited 2018 Oct 8];148(4):1162–1165. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1404629

  105. Koraitim MM, Reda IS. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in assessment of posterior urethral distraction defects. Urology. 2007;70(3):403–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Horiguchi A, Edo H, Soga S, Shinchi M, Masunaga A, Ito K, et al. Pubourethral stump angle measured on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging predicts Urethroplasty type for pelvic fracture urethral injury repair. Urology [Internet]. Elsevier; 2018;112:198–204. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.09.038.

  107. El-Kassaby AW, Osman T, Abdel-Aal A, Sadek M, Nayef N. Dynamic three-dimensional spiral computed tomographic cysto-urethrography: a novel technique for evaluating post-traumatic posterior urethral defects. BJU Int. 2003;92(9):993–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Zhang XM, Hu WL, He HX, Lv J, Nie HB, Yao HQ, et al. Diagnosis of male posterior urethral stricture: comparison of 64-MDCT urethrography vs. standard urethrography. Abdom Imaging. 2011;36(6):771–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Chou C-P, Huang J-S, Yu C-C, Pan H-B, Huang F-D. Urethral diverticulum: diagnosis with virtual CT urethroscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol [Internet]. 2005 [cited 2018 Oct 9];184(6):1889–1890. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15908547

  110. Feng C, Shen YL, Xu YM, Fu Q, Sa YL, Xie H, et al. CT virtual cystourethroscopy for complex urethral strictures: an investigative, descriptive study. Int Urol Nephrol. 2014;46(5):857–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Orabi H, Aboushwareb T, Tan J, Yoo JJ, Atala A. Can computed tomography – assisted virtual endoscopy be an innovative tool for detecting urethral tissue pathologies? Urology [Internet]. Elsevier; 2014;83(4):930–6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.11.014.

  112. Song L, Xie M, Zhang Y, Xu Y. Imaging techniques for the diagnosis of male traumatic urethral strictures. J Xray Sci Technol. 2013;21(1):111–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Keith F. Rourke .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendices: Clinical Presentation and Diagnostic Evaluation of Urethral Stricture

Appendices: Clinical Presentation and Diagnostic Evaluation of Urethral Stricture

1.1 Appendix 1

figure a

1.2 Appendix 2

Procedure Description for RUG/VCUG

Materials. Antiseptic solution to prep and sterile field should be available for draping. Our recommendation is to use a 60 ml syringe with a catheter tip adaptor and a long gauze to wrap and hold the penis. Alternatives are to utilize a 6-12F Foley’s catheter or a Brodny’s clamp. Inner sheath of intravenous catheter may be useful for meatal strictures. Intraurethral anesthetic lubrication is not recommended. Approximately 30–60 ml of water-soluble contrast (e.g., diatrizoate meglumine or iohexol). A tray should be available if VCUG is planned. Leaded gloves and apron for the staff are required.

Positioning. Subjects (specially their pelvis) should be placed obliquely at 20°–45° on a radiolucent stretcher, with the bottom hip flexed at 45°–90° and the top leg stretched down. Whether to use a right- or left-oblique positioning, is totally upon surgeon’s preference, as long as he/she stands on the opposite side of the screening arm. When positioning is correct, a scout film should show the lower obturator fossa completely closed, this prevents a potential underestimation of bulbar strictures length.

Fluoroscopy and Normal Findings. Scout film can detect stones, urethral or ureteral stents, staples or brachytherapy seeds. The long gauze is placed gently wrapping the penis, just below the corona, stretching it to get an optimal estimation of the urethral length. Contrast is then slowly injected under continuous fluoroscopy, demonstrating urethral distensibility, while saving sequential pictures. The goal is to see contrast passing through both the stricture and the membranous urethra, at least. Bladder filling for VCUG can be achieved by either RUG instillation or through a SPC (when placed beforehand).

Normal findings on RUG are: a uniform and smooth but narrower penile urethra transitioning to a wider bulbar urethra in an S-shaped fashion at the penoscrotal (penobulbar) junction; a bulbar tapering into membranous urethra forming a symmetrical cone which continues as a 1–2 cm long faint strand, representing the membranous urethra; then, an oval filling defect corresponding to the verumontanum is seen, along with a slight widening at the prostatic urethra; finally, the most proximal narrow segment before the bladder is the bladder neck. Under normal conditions, the posterior urethra will not be distended by RUG. Sometimes, Littre’s (penile) and Cowper’s (bulbomembranous) glands are seen on normal RUG, but they are usually seen secondary to obstruction. A filling defect at the proximal bulbar urethra due to a contraction of an anterior part of the bulbospongiosus muscle (compressor nudae) can be confused with a USx.

If voiding is achieved, normal findings on VCUG are: bladder neck, and prostatic and membranous urethra are open. Anterior urethra is poorly partially distended and delineation is suboptimal for a proper interpretation.

Tips and Troubleshooting. If the catheter-tip adaptor does not pass through a meatal/fossa stricture during RUG, it can be replaced by an intravenous sheath or one may use a 6-8F pediatric cystoscope or even a ureteroscope. When a subject is not able to void in the context of a bulbomembranous or posterior stenosis/PFUI during VCUG, the bladder neck status (regarding either function or anatomy) cannot be appropriately evaluated, so that, an attempt to ascendingly pass a 6-8F pediatric cystoscope can be done. If available, it might be necessary to perform an antegrade flexible cystoscopy through a SPC tract along with a RUG, simultaneously. If there is no previous tract, an 18F SPC might be placed, so antegrade cystoscopy could be done 3–5 weeks later, to better define the defect length and bladder neck status (incompetence, fibrosis, tethering or non-relaxing). Some simple non-evidence-based maneuvers may be attempted in case of psychological inhibition to void, e.g., to fill the bladder until the need to void is triggered, to open a water faucet, to play relaxing music, to turn the room’s lights off, and/or to place the patient in a standing position (but still obliquely). In patients with a known BPH, alfa-blockers may be initiated >7 days before VCUG. Information about posterior urethra/bladder neck may be critical in surgical planning and predicting postoperative continence after reconstruction.

1.3 Appendix 3

Procedure Description for SUG

Materials. Same preparation than used for RUG is made. Typically, SUG is performed with a linear transducer between 5 and 15 mHz. Urethra is slowly and steadily distended with 20–100 ml of sterile saline or jelly injected using the same materials and in the same fashion as in RUG, excluding air bubbles.

Positioning. Unlike in RUG, either a normal supine, a frog-legged or a low-lithotomy position is used, depending on the stricture length and location.

SUG Scanning. Under cephalad stretching, towards the pubic bone, multiple transverse and longitudinal scans on the ventral penile surface can be taken until length, caliber, location, spongiofibrosis, and coexistent pathology are identified. The same is repeated at the penoscrotal junction (trans-scrotally) for proximal penile and bulbar USx.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Saavedra, A.A., Rourke, K.F. (2020). Clinical Presentation and Diagnostic Evaluation of Male Urethral Stricture. In: Martins, F.E., Kulkarni, S.B., Köhler, T.S. (eds) Textbook of Male Genitourethral Reconstruction. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21447-0_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21447-0_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-21446-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-21447-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics