Objective: To study the role of magnetic resonance imaging in assessment of posterior urethra distraction defects with respect to location, length and depth of scar involved.

Methods: This was a prospective observational study. Patients aged 18-70 years, diagnosed with posterior urethral defect on conventional retrograde and voiding cystourethrography method were included in the study. All the patients planned for surgery had undergone MRI pelvis. All of the patients included in the study got a RGU/MCU done.

Results: Half of patients were below 30 years of age (50%). About one third of patients were between 30-50 years (30%). Road traffic accident was the most common cases of posterior urethral distraction defects (50%). Short Segment Stricture were in 6 (30%) of subjects on conventional retrograde urethrography combined with voiding cystourethrography, 8 (40%) on Magnetic Resonance Urethrography, 9 (45%) were at intraoperatively. Stricture was present at membranous part of urethra in 14 (70%) of subjects on conventional retrograde urethrography combined with voiding cystourethrography, 16 (80%) on Magnetic Resonance Urethrography and Intraoperatively. Periurethral fibrosis did not demonstrated in conventional retrograde urethrography combined with voiding cystourethrography, but Magnetic Resonance Urethrography imaging demonstrated periurethral fibrosis in 4(20%) patients.

Conclusion: MR urethrography is a promising tool for defining posterior male urethral strictures as an alternative to traditional radiographic methods. The future of MR Urethrography in the evaluation of posterior urethral distraction defects is mainly in cases with complex urethral distraction injuries, patients with multiple fistulae and in children.

Keywords: Magnetic resonance imaging, Posterior urethral distraction, Retrogradeurethrography, Voiding cystourethrography.

1. Osman Yasser, Abou El-Ghar Mohamed, Mansour Osama, Refaie Huda, El-Diasty Tarek. Magnetic Resonance Urethrogra-phy in Comparison to Retrograde Urethro-graphy in Diagnosis of Male Urethral Strictures: Is It Clinically Relevant? European urology 2006; 50: 587–594.
2. Yoshifumi Narumi, HedvigHricak, Armenakas NA et al : MR imaging of traumatic posterior urethral injury. Radiology 188 : 439-443 ,1993.
3. Christopher M. Dixon, HedvigHricak, Jack W. McAninch, MR imaging of traumatic posterior urethral distraction defects and pelvic crush injuries. J Urol 148: 1162-1165, 1992.
4. Sudarshan G, Santhosh B, Srinivas S, Mohan K Seshu, Chandra D Aman. Role of MRI in post traumatic posterior urethral distraction defects in comparison to RGU/ MCUG. IAIM, 2016; 3(12): 99-107.
5. Yoshifumi Naruni, et al. MR Imaging of Traumatic Posterior Urethral Injury. Radlogy, 1993; 188: 439-443.
6. Christopher M., Dixon Jack W, McAnnich, et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Traumatic Posterior Urethral Defects and Pelvic Crush Injuries. The Jr. of Urology, 1992; 148: 1162-1165.
7. Gallentine M, Morey A. Imaging of the male urethra for stricture disease.UrolClin North Am 2002;29: 361–72.
8. Cunningham J. The diagnosis of stricture of the urethra by Roentgen rays. Trans Am Assoc Genitourin Surg 1910; 5:369–71.
9. El-Diasty T, El-Ghar M, Shokeir A, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging as a sole method for the morphological and functional evaluation of live kidney donors. BJU Int 2005;96:111-6.

Dr Pankaj Singh

Assistant Professor, Department of General Surgery,

UPUMS, Saifai, Etawah, UP

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.