Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Karger Publishers, Urologia Internationalis, 4(99), p. 453-459, 2017

DOI: 10.1159/000478026

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Laser versus Cold Knife Urethrotomy in the Management of Patients with Urethral Strictures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Urethral strictures generate great morbidity. Two procedures have been described for their management - laser and cold knife techniques - which are still widely used. We aim to assess the safety and efficacy of laser versus cold knife urethrotomy. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> We conducted a systematic search of the literature using MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS and Cochrane databases and gray literature. Primary outcomes were urethral stricture recurrence, time-to-recurrence and complication rate. Secondary outcomes were quality of life and maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax). Data analysis was obtained using Review Manager 5.2. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Out of 137 publications, 4 articles were included in the meta-analysis. At 3 months, the recurrence rate was similar in both groups (0.55, 95% CI 0.18-1.66), but at 6 and 12 months, it was significantly lower in the laser urethrotomy group (0.39, 95% CI 0.19-0.81 and 0.44, 95% CI 0.26-0.75). The analysis of Qmax at 6 months post-intervention suggested a greater improvement in the laser urethrotomy group. A qualitative analysis showed that complications in both procedures were minor and infrequent. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Laser urethrotomy has a lower recurrence rate at 6 and 12 months compared to cold knife urethrotomy. Complications in both procedures are minor and infrequent. Results should be interpreted cautiously, since they were evaluated only for a short term.