Cosmetic and functional outcomes of two-stage XXXX repair: an objective scoring evaluation and uroflowmetry.

@entity1 @entity4094 @entity2650
OBJECTIVE: The functional outcome following @entity2650 repair is as important as the cosmetic outcome. Currently, structured scoring systems, @entity1 questionnaires and evaluations of photographs and uroflowmetry are used to assess the results of @entity2650 repair. In the present study, we assessed the outcomes of two-stage @entity2650 repair using Hypospadias Objective Scoring Evaluation-HOSE and measures of uroflowmetry. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Over a period of eight years, from January 1997 to December 2004, 126 @entity2650 @entity1 were treated, 90 of these @entity1 received two-stage repairs and 36 @entity1 received single-stage repairs. HOSE questionnaire and uroflowmetry data were obtained to evaluate the long-term outcome of the two-stage @entity2650 repairs. RESULTS: The age at the time of assessment ranged from 8 to 23 years-old, with a mean follow-up time of 39.78 months. Thirty-five @entity1 had @entity4094 , and 20 had @entity2650 . Of the 55 @entity1 who received complete two-stage @entity2650 repair and agreed to participate in the study, nineteen @entity1 had acceptable HOSE scores and 36 @entity1 had non-acceptable scores. The uroflow rates of 43 of the subjects were below the fifth percentile in three @entity1 , equivocal (between the 5(th) and 25(th) percentile) in four @entity1 and above the 25(th) percentile in 36 @entity1 . CONCLUSION: Two-stage repair is a suitable technique for all types of @entity2650 with varying outcomes. HOSE and uroflowmetry are simple, easy, non-invasive and non-expensive tools for objectively assessing the long-term outcomes of @entity2650 repair.
