Dorsal shortening vs. ventral lengthening for congenital ventral curvature in patients with/without severe hypospadias

A meta-analysis of comparative studies

Authors

  • Michael Chua Sickkids
  • Priyank Yadav SickKids
  • Adam Bobrowski SickKids
  • Jin Kyu Kim SickKids
  • Jan Michael Silangcruz Institute of Urology, St. Luke’s Medical Center, Quezon City, Philippines
  • Jessica Ming University of New Mexico
  • Mandy Rickard SickKids
  • Armando Lorenzo SickKids
  • Darius Bagli SickKids
  • Antoine Khoury University of California Irvine

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8223

Keywords:

Plication, corporotomy, penile curvature, meta-analysis

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Herein, we compared surgical outcome of dorsal shortening (DS) vs. ventral lengthening (VL) for correcting congenital ventral curvatures.

METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in September 2021 using the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, CENTRAL, ProQuest, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases. Comparative studies were identified and evaluated according to Cochrane Collaboration recommendations. Assessed outcomes included success and complication rates, which were extrapolated for the respective odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses were performed according to congenital curvature, with or without severe hypospadias or recurrent curvatures (PROSPERO: CRD42021276193).

RESULTS: Based on pooled effect estimates from 12 studies with 430 (DS 253, VL 177) cases of ventral curvature repair, VL rendered a better success rate for curvature correction (OR 4.20, 95% CI 2.11, 8.33) than DS, with comparable composite surgical complication rates (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.27, 2.18). Subgroup analysis showed that the success rate remained significantly better for VL among patients with associated severe hypospadias (OR 3.59, 95% CI 1.25, 10.26) and recurrent penile curvatures (OR 5.70, 95% CI 1.69, 19.21) but not among those with congenital curvature without hypospadias or those with mild hypospadias (OR 2.99, 95% CI 0.32, 27.57).

CONCLUSIONS: For congenital curvature associated with severe hypospadias and recurrent curvatures, VL renders a modestly better success rate; however, careful selection of patients is key for best outcome.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2023-04-11

How to Cite

Chua, M. ., Yadav, P. ., Bobrowski, A. ., Kim, J. K. ., Silangcruz, J. M. ., Ming, J. ., Rickard, M. ., Lorenzo, A., Bagli, D. ., & Khoury, A. . (2023). Dorsal shortening vs. ventral lengthening for congenital ventral curvature in patients with/without severe hypospadias: A meta-analysis of comparative studies. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 17(7), E208–14. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.8223

Issue

Vol. 17 No. 7 (2023): CUAJ July

Section

Review

License

You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:

  • Post the Article on any Web site
  • Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.

The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.

You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.

The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:

  • That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
  • That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
  • That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
  • That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.