A ventral rotational skin flap to improve cosmesis and avoid chordee recurrence in epispadias repair.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a technical modification that facilitates dorsal skin closure, improves cosmesis and eliminates chordee recurrence secondary to contracture of the dorsal penile skin in the repair of epispadias. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eleven patients with penopubic epispadias (mean age 1.8 years) had the epispadias repaired using a modified ventral penile skin flap. Four patients had isolated epispadias and seven had had a previous primary closure of bladder exstrophy. Nine patients underwent the Cantwell-Ransley technique, leaving the meatus in a glanular position. Two patients were repaired using the penile disassembly technique of Mitchell and Bägli, because they had a short urethral plate. A ventral island skin flap was fashioned, starting at the base of the penis. Dissection was carried ventrally into the scrotum to allow for adequate dorsal flap transposition. The flap was rotated laterally to shift the suture line from the midline and to cover the dorsal aspect of the penis with untouched penile shaft skin. Redundant ventral foreskin was discarded. RESULTS: All patients had an uneventful course after surgery. Dorsal penile skin was viable in every case and no patient developed recurrence of chordee or a urethrocutaneous fistula. The cosmetic result was excellent in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Dorsal skin closure using lateral rotation of ventral penile skin flap improves cosmesis after epispadias repair and eliminates the recurrence of chordee secondary to midline dorsal scarring

Digital pattern recognition for the identification and classification of hypospadias using artificial intelligence vs experienced pediatric urologist

Objective: To improve hypospadias classification system, we hereby, show the use of machine learning/image recognition to increase objectivity of hypospadias recognition and classification. Hypospadias anatomical variables such as meatal location, qualityQ3Revista Nacional - IndexadaA1S

Surgery in disorders of sex development (DSD) with a gender issue: If (why), when, and how?

International audienceTen years after the consensus meeting on disorders of sex development (DSD), genital surgery continues to raise questions and criticisms concerning its indications, its technical aspects, timing and evaluation. This standpoint details each distinct situation and its possible management in 5 main groups of DSD patients with atypical genitalia: the 46,XX DSD group (congenital adrenal hyperplasia); the heterogeneous 46,XY DSD group (gonadal dysgenesis, disorders of steroidogenesis, target tissues impairments …); gonosomic mosaicisms (45,X/46,XY patients); ovo-testicular DSD; and "non-hormonal/non chromosomal" DSD. Questions are summarized for each DSD group with the support of literature and the feed-back of several world experts. Given the complexity and heterogeneity of presentation there is no consensus regarding the indications, the timing, the procedure nor the evaluation of outcome of DSD surgery. There are, however, some issues on which most experts would agree: 1) The need for identifying centres of expertise with a multidisciplinary approach; 2) A conservative management of the gonads in complete androgen insensitivity syndrome at least until puberty although some studies expressed concerns about the heightened tumour risk in this group; 3) To avoid vaginal dilatation in children after surgical reconstruction; 4) To keep asymptomatic mullerian remnants during childhood; 5) To remove confirmed streak gonads when Y material is present; 6) It is likely that 46,XY cloacal exstrophy, aphallia and severe micropenis would do best raised as male although this is based on limited outcome data. There is general acknowledgement among experts that timing, the choice of the individual and irreversibility of surgical procedures are sources of concerns. There is, however, little evidence provided regarding the impact of non-treated DSD during childhood for the individual development, the parents, society and the risk of stigmatization. The low level of evidence should lead to design collaborative prospective studies involving all parties and using consensual protocols of evaluation