Ammar Alhasso

Does Closure of the Buccal Mucosal Graft Bed Matter? Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE To study the effects of closure vs nonclosure of buccal mucosal graft harvest site. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients were randomized to either primary closure or nonclosure of buccal mucosal harvest site during urethroplasty. Graft widths were standardized to 2 cm. Prospective data were collected via patient visual analog scales (0-10) of 5 domains examining pain, numbness, tightness, drinking, and eating at postoperative day 1 and 3 and then at 3 weeks and 3 months until 1 year. RESULTS There were 34 patients who underwent randomization and completed the study. The preoperative demographics between both groups were comparable with no significant differences. The median age is 44 years. There were 16 patients in the closure group and 18 patients in the nonclosure group. The results show an improvement in the domains of pain (P = .08), drinking (P = .06), and eating (P = .03) in favor of the closure group at postoperative day 1 and 3. There are no significant differences in all 5 domains between both groups after 3 weeks postoperatively CONCLUSION This study shows that primary closure of buccal mucosal graft bed improves pain as well as oral intake in the immediate postoperative period. There are no long-term differences.

Small bowel injury after suprapubic catheter insertion presenting 3 years after initial insertion

A 77-year-old woman was referred to urology with blockages of her suprapubic catheter (SPC). The catheter was replaced easily in the emergency department, however, no urine was draining, only a cloudy green fluid was visible. On cystoscopy bilious material was identified in the bladder. There was no catheter visible. There seemed to be a fistulous tract entering the bladder at the left dome. The urethra was dilated, a urethral catheter was placed and the SPC was removed. A CT demonstrated that the SPC tract transfixed a loop of pelvic small bowel and entered the bladder with no intraperitoneal contrast leak. The patient recovered well and did not require laparotomy. This case emphasises that bowel perforation, although rare, must be considered as a complication of SPC placement even years after initial insertion when catheter problems arise. Unusually, we learn that this complication may not present with abdominal pain or peritonism.