Treatment of pelvic fracture-related urethral trauma: a survey of current practice in the UK

OBJECTIVE To quantify experience of pelvic fracture-related urethral trauma (PFUT), a condition not often encountered and managed by urologists. METHODS The consultant urologists of the UK and Ireland were contacted informally to establish their experience with PFUT and its management, both immediate and delayed. In addition, particular individuals thought to have a specific interest in PFUT were targeted for more data. RESULTS The overall response rate was 49% (235 responders), representing 78% of urological departments, including all the targeted individuals. Of the responders, 129 (55%) had never seen PFUT in 1-25 years of consultant practice. Only four urologists (2% of responders) saw three or more cases a year. Another four (2%) saw one or two cases per year and the remaining 98 (41%) saw PFUT less frequently. Acutely, 69% of urologists who treated PFUT did so by placing a urethral catheter. Subsequent strictures were treated endoscopically for as long as this was possible. The other 31% inserted a suprapubic catheter and referred the patient for reconstructive surgery if needed. Those who used urethroplasty for strictures after PFUT were identified and targeted; half used urethral mobilization and spatulated anastomosis alone. Only three surgeons performed more than five procedures a year. CONCLUSION Whatever a specialist reconstructive unit might do, practice in the wider urological community is different. Even within specialized units, PFUT is rare and the surgical management is often significantly different from published 'expert' opinion.