PURPOSE: There is a paucity of long-term objective and patient-reported outcomes after definitive perineal urethrostomy for complex urethral strictures. Our objective is to determine comprehensive long-term success of perineal urethrostomy with our 15-year experience at a reconstructive referral center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent perineal urethrostomy between 2009 and 2023 were identified. A comprehensive long-term follow-up was conducted, evaluating both objective outcomes (retreatment-free survival) and subjective outcomes through the use of validated questionnaires. Additionally, to provide further context for our findings, we conducted a scoping review of all studies reporting outcomes following perineal urethrostomy. RESULTS: Among 76 patients, 55% had iatrogenic strictures, with 82% previously undergoing urethral interventions. At a median follow-up of 55 months, retreatment-free survival was 84%, with 16% of patients experiencing perineal urethrostomy recurrent stenosis. Patient-reported outcomes revealed a generally satisfactory voiding function (Urethral Stricture Surgery Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms score) and continence (International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form), with median scores of 4 (range 0-24) and 0 (range 0-21), but with bimodal distributions of sexual function scores (median International Index of Erectile Function-Erectile Function domain: 3.5; median Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculation Scale: 21). Treatment satisfaction was very high with a median International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Satisfaction outcome score of 21 (range 0-24). The scoping review revealed varying success rates ranging from 51% to 95%, highlighting difficulties in comparison due to variable success definitions and patient case mix. CONCLUSIONS: Perineal urethrostomy provides effective treatment for complex anterior urethral strictures, with high patient satisfaction, preserved continence function, and favorable voiding outcomes. It presents a viable option for older and comorbid patients, especially after thorough counseling on expected outcomes and potential risks.

Department of Urology 2nd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czech Republic

Department of Urology Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria

Department of Urology Semmelweis University Budapest Hungary

Department of Urology University Medical Center Hamburg Eppendorf Hamburg Germany

Department of Urology University of Texas Southwestern Dallas Texas

Department of Urology Weill Cornell Medical College New York New York

Division of Urology Department of Special Surgery The University of Jordan Amman Jordan

Institute for Urology and Reproductive Health Sechenov University Moscow Russia

Karl Landsteiner Institute of Urology and Andrology Vienna Austria

References provided by Crossref.org