Safety and Effectiveness of Meatal Mobilization (MEMO) Technique for Glandular, Coronal, and Subcoronal Hypospadias Repair in Children: A 5-Year Single-Center Study with 105 Hypospadias

Abstract

Background: This study aims to compare outcomes of treatment, in terms of early and late complications, between the Snodgrass and meatal mobilization (MEMO) techniques in children operated on because of distal hypospadias. Methods: The medical records of 127 children who underwent glandular, coronal, or subcoronal hypospadias repair between 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 105 children met the inclusion criteria and were included in further analysis. The inclusion criteria were pediatric patients who underwent glandular, coronal, or subcoronal hypospadias repair using MEMO (n = 49) or the Snodgrass technique (n = 56) as a comparative group. The primary outcome of this study was the incidence of early and late complications with two different surgical techniques. Secondary outcomes were the duration of surgery, the length of hospital stay, the number of readmissions or unplanned returns to the operating room, and repeat surgeries between groups. Results: The median age of all patients was 17 (interquartile range, IQR 13, 29) months, with a median follow-up of 26 (IQR 17, 34) months. Regarding the type of hypospadias, the majority of patients in both groups were categorized as coronal and subroronal hypospadias. Regarding the incidence of postoperative complications, a significantly lower incidence of postoperative complications was found in the MEMO group compared to the Snodgrass group (n = 4; 8.2% vs. n = 14; 25%; p = 0.037). An urethrocutaneous fistula was the most common complication in the Snodgrass group (n = 8; 14.3%), while in the MEMO group, only one patient (2%) developed a fistula (p = 0.034). The incidence of meatal stenosis (p = 0.621) and wound infections (p > 0.999) was low in both groups. No further complications were recorded during the follow-up period. Duration of surgery (41 min (IQR 38, 47) vs. 51 min (IQR 45.5, 61); p < 0.001), duration of hospitalization (1 day (IQR 1, 2) vs. 3 days (IQR 2, 6); p < 0.001), and time to catheter removal (3 days (IQR 2.5, 5) vs. 6 days (IQR 6, 8); p < 0.001) were significantly lower in patients operated on with MEMO compared to the Snodgrass technique. Only one case of readmission due to severe wound infection which led to suturing line dehiscence was recorded in the Snodgrass group. The incidence of redo surgery was significantly lower in the MEMO group than in the Snodgrass group (n = 3; 6.1% vs. n = 11; 19.6%; p = 0.048). Conclusions: MEMO is a safe and effective technique that can be used for the treatment of distal hypospadias. It showed excellent outcomes, cosmetic results, and a low incidence of complications as well as a significantly shorter duration of surgery compared to the Snodgrass technique.