Download PDF
Eur J Pediatr Surg 2023; 33(06): 441-453
DOI: 10.1055/a-2048-7486
Review Article

The Role of Postoperative Dressing in Hypospadias Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Pediatric Literature

Maria Escolino
1   Department of Pediatric Surgery, Federico II University Hospital, Napoli, Campania, Italy
,
Luisa Florio
1   Department of Pediatric Surgery, Federico II University Hospital, Napoli, Campania, Italy
,
Giovanni Esposito
2   Department of Biotechnologies, CEINGE Advanced Biotechnologies, Napoli, Campania, Italy
,
Ciro Esposito
1   Department of Pediatric Surgery, Federico II University Hospital, Napoli, Campania, Italy
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

This study aimed to describe the available dressings and their management in patients undergoing hypospadias repair and compare postoperative outcomes with and without dressing and between the different dressing types. A comprehensive electronic literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library was conducted to obtain studies, published in the period 1990 to 2021, reporting on the dressing used following hypospadias surgery. All information regarding the dressing was considered as primary endpoints, whereas surgical outcomes were assessed as secondary outcomes. Thirty-one studies containing 1,790 subjects undergoing hypospadias repair were included. Dressings were divided into three categories: nonadherent to the wound, adherent to the wound, and glue-based dressings. Most authors preferred to remove/change the dressing in the ward and the median time of removal/change was 6.56 postoperative days. The dressing removal appeared as the most frequent factor generating parental anxiety. The median rate of wound-related complications was 8.18%, of urethroplasty complications 9.08% and of reoperations 8.18%. Meta-analysis of outcomes showed higher risk of reoperations using conventional dressing, with no differences in urethroplasty and wound-related complications rates between conventional and glue-based dressings. Furthermore, the use of dressing reported increased risk of wound-related complications compared with no dressing, without significant differences regarding occurrence of urethroplasty complications and reoperations. The current evidence confirmed that there is no difference in outcomes of hypospadias repair depending on a certain dressing type. To date, surgeon's preference remains the main factor determining the choice for a specific dressing or for no dressing at all.

Keywords

dressing - hypospadias - wound - material - complications


Publication History

Received: 26 December 2022

Accepted: 02 March 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
07 March 2023

Article published online:
04 April 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Hadidi AT. History of hypospadias: lost in translation. J Pediatr Surg 2017; 52 (02) 211-217
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Spinoit AF, Poelaert F, Groen LA, Van Laecke E, Hoebeke P. Hypospadias repair at a tertiary care center: long-term followup is mandatory to determine the real complication rate. J Urol 2013; 189 (06) 2276-2281
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lu YC, Huang WY, Chen YF. et al. Factors associated with reoperation in hypospadias surgery—a nationwide, population-based study. Asian J Surg 2017; 40 (02) 116-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Ru W, Tang D, Wu D. et al. Identification of risk factors associated with numerous reoperations following primary hypospadias repair. J Pediatr Urol 2021; 17 (01) 61.e1-61.e5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Bhat A. General considerations in hypospadias surgery. Indian J Urol 2008; 24 (02) 188-194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Castagnetti M, El-Ghoneimi A. The influence of perioperative factors on primary severe hypospadias repair. Nat Rev Urol 2011; 8 (04) 198-206
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Anand S. Tissue glue-based dressings following hypospadias repair: a game-changer or a useless gimmick!. J Pediatr Urol 2021; 17 (05) 679-680
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Singh A, Anand S, Goel P, Yadav DK, Bajpai M. Can sealing promote healing?: a systematic review and meta-analysis highlighting the adjunctive role of tissue sealant application during urethroplasty for hypospadias. J Pediatr Urol 2021; 17 (06) 805-812
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Anzolin AP, da Silveira-Kaross NL, Bertol CD. Ozonated oil in wound healing: what has already been proven?. Med Gas Res 2020; 10 (01) 54-59
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Tan KK, Reid CD. A simple penile dressing following hypospadias surgery. Br J Plast Surg 1990; 43 (05) 628-629
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Redman JF. A dressing technique that facilitates outpatient hypospadias surgery. Urology 1991; 37 (03) 248-250
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Burbige KA. Simplified postoperative management of hypospadias repair. Urology 1994; 43 (05) 719-721
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ohsumi N. Postoperative compressive penile dressing using fibrin seal (Tisseel) and tulle gauze for hypospadias repair. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998; 101 (06) 1737-1738
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Bahia H, Ahmed O, Hart NB. A new tie-over dressing for hypospadias repair. Br J Plast Surg 1999; 52 (08) 674-675
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Davalbhakta A, Summerlad BC. Cavi-Care dressing for hypospadias repair. Br J Plast Surg 1999; 52 (04) 325-326
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 van Savage JG, Palanca LG, Slaughenhoupt BL. A prospective randomized trial of dressings versus no dressings for hypospadias repair. J Urol 2000; 164 (3 Pt 2): 981-983
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 McLorie G, Joyner B, Herz D. et al. A prospective randomized clinical trial to evaluate methods of postoperative care of hypospadias. J Urol 2001; 165 (05) 1669-1672
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Searles JM, MacKinnon AE. The ‘SANAV’ hypospadias dressing. BJU Int 2001; 87 (06) 531-533
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Singh RB, Khatri HL, Sethi R. Glove-finger dressing in paediatric hypospadias. Pediatr Surg Int 2002; 18 (2-3): 218-219
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Sanders C. Comparison of dressing removal following hypospadias repair. Br J Nurs 2003; 12 (15, Suppl) S21-S28
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Singh RB, Pavithran NM. Elastic and Velcro dressing for penis. Pediatr Surg Int 2004; 20 (05) 389-390
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Karabağli Y, Köse AA, Koçman AE, Cetin C. Industrial foam rubber as a pressure dressing. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 114 (03) 826
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Shaaban H, Dhita S. A simple method to remove a penile dressing. BJU Int 2004; 94 (09) 1402-1403
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Morris PN, Sassoon EM. Alleyvn: a quick, effective hypospadias dressing. Br J Plast Surg 2005; 58 (02) 277-278
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Gangopadhyay AN, Sharma S. Peha-haft bandage as a new dressing for hypospadias repair. Indian J Plast Surg 2005; 38: 162-164
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Sanders C, Young A, McAndrew HF, Kenny SE. A prospective randomized trial of the effect of a soluble adhesive on the ease of dressing removal following hypospadias repair. J Pediatr Urol 2007; 3 (03) 209-213
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Fathi K, Tsang T. A technique for applying a non-adherent, tri-laminate dressing for hypospadias repair. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2009; 91 (02) 164-165
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Narci A, Embleton DB, Boyaci EO, Mingir S, Cetinkurşun S. A practical offer for hypospadias dressing: Allevyn®. Afr J Paediatr Surg 2011; 8 (03) 272-274
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Hosseini SM, Rasekhi AR, Zarenezhad M, Hedjazi A. Cyanoacrylate glue dressing for hypospadias surgery. N Am J Med Sci 2012; 4 (07) 320-322
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Tan HL, Nah SA, Budianto II, Sehat S, Tamba R. The use of octyl cyanoacrylate (superglue) in hypospadias repair including its use as a fixator for urethral stents. J Pediatr Surg 2012; 47 (12) 2294-2297
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Martins AG, Lima SV, Araújo LA, Vilar FdeO, Cavalcante NT. A wet dressing for hypospadias surgery. Int Braz J Urol 2013; 39 (03) 408-413
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Menon P, Rao KL. Novel use of gelatine sponge as primary dressing in Hypospadias surgery. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg 2015; 20 (01) 54
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Wang Y, Li S. The tubular elastic net bandage: a useful penile dressing in pediatric hypospadias. Indian J Surg 2015; 77 (Suppl. 03) 1425-1427
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Vilar FO, Pinto FC, Albuquerque AV. et al. A wet dressing for male genital surgery: a phase II clinical trial. Int Braz J Urol 2016; 42 (06) 1220-1227
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Méndez-Gallart R, García-Palacios M, Rodríguez-Barca P, Estévez-Martínez E, Carril AL, Bautista-Casasnovas A. A simple dressing for hypospadias surgery in children. Can Urol Assoc J 2017; 11 (1-2): E58-E59
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Brockway WJ, Bradsher AJ, Hook JE, Patel AS, Zamilpa I, Canon SJ. 2-octyl cyanoacrylate hypospadias repair dressing: a retrospective, controlled comparison. Can J Urol 2019; 26 (01) 9675-9679
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Hsieh MKH, Lai MC, Azman NM, Cheng JJSH, Lim GJS. The cock-up splint: a novel malleable, rigid, and durable dressing construct for the post-hypospadias repair. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2019; 7 (08) e2369
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Esposito C, Del Conte F, Cerulo M. et al. Evaluation of efficacy of oxygen-enriched oil-based gel dressing in patients who underwent surgical repair of distal hypospadias: a prospective randomised clinical trial. World J Urol 2021; 39 (06) 2205-2215
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Esposito C, Coppola V, Del Conte F. et al. Evaluation of a new tubular finger oxygen-enriched oil inside-coated dressing device in pediatric patients undergoing distal hypospadias repair: a prospective randomized clinical trial part II. Front Pediatr 2021; 9: 638406
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Karakaya AE, Güler AG, Doğan AB. Dressing or not after tubularized incised plate urethroplasty. Urol Int 2021; 105 (11-12): 1029-1033
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar