Definition and research guide
This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.
Content available: 4 complete abstracts (1,023 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.
Definition
Partial or complete blockage in any part of the urethra that can lead to difficulty or inability to empty the urinary bladder. It is characterized by an enlarged, often damaged, bladder with frequent urges to void.
Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.
Also known as: Obstructions, Urethral; Obstruction, Urethral; Urethral Obstructions.
Where it fits in the MeSH classification
- Broader topics
- Urethral Diseases
- Narrower topics
- Urethral Stricture; Urinary Bladder Neck Obstruction
Related concepts
Research landscape
PubMed indexes 12,901 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Urethral Obstruction” (counts retrieved 2026-11-04). 1,848 of them (14.3%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is through 1999 with 5,835 records.
Reviews account for 1,389 records (10.8%) and meta-analyses for 102. Randomized controlled trials number 306 (2.4%) as a share of all records on the topic.
Show the data
| Period | Records |
|---|---|
| through 1999 | 5,835 |
| 2000-2009 | 2,355 |
| 2010-2019 | 2,863 |
| 2020 onward | 1,848 |
Publication-type chart data
| Type | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 1,389 | 10.8% |
| Meta-analyses | 102 | 0.8% |
| Randomized controlled trials | 306 | 2.4% |
Method: PubMed query "Urethral Obstruction"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-11-04.
Reading the evidence in kidney, urology and women's health
Kidney, urinary and reproductive health research uses lab markers (such as creatinine), imaging, symptom scores and registry data on pregnancy and birth. Findings about pregnancy are especially sensitive to who was studied and when in pregnancy exposure occurred. Nothing on this page is advice about treatment, fertility or pregnancy; speak to a qualified clinician. Check the population, the outcome measured and whether the study accounted for other health differences between groups.
Evidence from open-access studies
These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.
| Study / authors | Year | Source label / design | Europe PMC citations | Licence / source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical practice guideline for transurethral plasmakinetic resection of prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia (2021 Edition) | 2022 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 41 | cc by PMID 35361280 · DOI · PMC8974007 |
| Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine in Pediatric Urology: Urethral and Urinary Bladder Reconstruction | 2022 | Review article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 31 | cc by PMID 35742803 · DOI · PMC9224288 |
| Tailor-made natural and synthetic grafts for precise urethral reconstruction | 2022 | Review article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 18 | cc by PMID 36045428 · DOI · PMC9429763 |
| New measurement method for long-term oral complications after harvesting buccal mucosa grafts for urethroplasty | 2025 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 1 | cc by PMID 40635013 · DOI · PMC12239327 |
Clinical practice guideline for transurethral plasmakinetic resection of prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia (2021 Edition) [1]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is highly prevalent among older men, impacting on their quality of life, sexual function, and genitourinary health, and has become an important global burden of disease.
- Closing excerpt
- We hope these recommendations can help support healthcare workers caring for patients having TUPKP for the treatment of BPH.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (453 words)
Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is highly prevalent among older men, impacting on their quality of life, sexual function, and genitourinary health, and has become an important global burden of disease. Transurethral plasmakinetic resection of prostate (TUPKP) is one of the foremost surgical procedures for the treatment of BPH. It has become well established in clinical practice with good efficacy and safety. In 2018, we issued the guideline "2018 Standard Edition". However much new direct evidence has now emerged and this may change some of previous recommendations. The time is ripe to develop new evidence-based guidelines, so we formed a working group of clinical experts and methodologists. The steering group members posed 31 questions relevant to the management of TUPKP for BPH covering the following areas: questions relevant to the perioperative period (preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative) of TUPKP in the treatment of BPH, postoperative complications and the level of surgeons' surgical skill. We searched the literature for direct evidence on the management of TUPKP for BPH, and assessed its certainty generated recommendations using the grade criteria by the European Association of Urology. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of an ungraded consensus-based statement. Finally, we issued 36 statements. Among them, 23 carried strong recommendations, and 13 carried weak recommendations for the stated procedure. They covered questions relevant to the aforementioned three areas. The preoperative period for TUPKP in the treatment of BPH included indications and contraindications for TUPKP, precautions for preoperative preparation in patients with renal impairment and urinary tract infection due to urinary retention, and preoperative prophylactic use of antibiotics. Questions relevant to the intraoperative period incorporated surgical operation techniques and prevention and management of bladder explosion. The application to different populations incorporating the efficacy and safety of TUPKP in the treatment of normal volume (< 80 ml) and large-volume (≥ 80 ml) BPH compared with transurethral urethral resection prostate, transurethral plasmakinetic enucleation of prostate and open prostatectomy; the efficacy and safety of TUPKP in high-risk populations and among people taking anticoagulant (antithrombotic) drugs. Questions relevant to the postoperative period incorporated the time and speed of flushing, the time indwelling catheters are needed, principles of postoperative therapeutic use of antibiotics, follow-up time and follow-up content. Questions related to complications incorporated types of complications and their incidence, postoperative leukocyturia, the treatment measures for the perforation and extravasation of the capsule, transurethral resection syndrome, postoperative bleeding, urinary catheter blockage, bladder spasm, overactive bladder, urinary incontinence, urethral stricture, rectal injury during surgery, postoperative erectile dysfunction and retrograde ejaculation. Final questions were related to surgeons' skills when performing TUPKP for the treatment of BPH. We hope these recommendations can help support healthcare workers caring for patients having TUPKP for the treatment of BPH.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 35361280 · DOI · PMC8974007
Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine in Pediatric Urology: Urethral and Urinary Bladder Reconstruction [2]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- In the case of pediatric urology there are several congenital conditions, such as hypospadias and neurogenic bladder, which affect, respectively, the urethra and the urinary bladder.
- Closing excerpt
- Moreover, the main critical features needed for urinary tissue engineering have been highlighted and specifically focused on for pediatric application.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (197 words)
In the case of pediatric urology there are several congenital conditions, such as hypospadias and neurogenic bladder, which affect, respectively, the urethra and the urinary bladder. In fact, the gold standard consists of a urethroplasty procedure in the case of urethral malformations and enterocystoplasty in the case of urinary bladder disorders. However, both surgical procedures are associated with severe complications, such as fistulas, urethral strictures, and dehiscence of the repair or recurrence of chordee in the case of urethroplasty, and metabolic disturbances, stone formation, urine leakage, and chronic infections in the case of enterocystoplasty. With the aim of overcoming the issue related to the lack of sufficient and appropriate autologous tissue, increasing attention has been focused on tissue engineering. In this review, both the urethral and the urinary bladder reconstruction strategies were summarized, focusing on pediatric applications and evaluating all the biomaterials tested in both animal models and patients. Particular attention was paid to the capability for tissue regeneration in dependence on the eventual presence of seeded cell and growth factor combinations in several types of scaffolds. Moreover, the main critical features needed for urinary tissue engineering have been highlighted and specifically focused on for pediatric application.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 35742803 · DOI · PMC9224288
Tailor-made natural and synthetic grafts for precise urethral reconstruction [3]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Injuries to the urethra can be caused by malformations, trauma, inflammation, or carcinoma, and reconstruction of the injured urethra is still a significant challenge in clinical urology.
- Closing excerpt
- In addition, future development and potential clinical application strategies of future urethral reconstruction grafts are predicted.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (125 words)
Injuries to the urethra can be caused by malformations, trauma, inflammation, or carcinoma, and reconstruction of the injured urethra is still a significant challenge in clinical urology. Implanting grafts for urethroplasty and end-to-end anastomosis are typical clinical interventions for urethral injury. However, complications and high recurrence rates remain unsatisfactory. To address this, urethral tissue engineering provides a promising modality for urethral repair. Additionally, developing tailor-made biomimetic natural and synthetic grafts is of great significance for urethral reconstruction. In this work, tailor-made biomimetic natural and synthetic grafts are divided into scaffold-free and scaffolded grafts according to their structures, and the influence of different graft structures on urethral reconstruction is discussed. In addition, future development and potential clinical application strategies of future urethral reconstruction grafts are predicted.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 36045428 · DOI · PMC9429763
New measurement method for long-term oral complications after harvesting buccal mucosa grafts for urethroplasty [4]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundPatients undergoing oral mucosa harvesting for urethroplasty may experience several challenges during recovery like scarring or changes in oral sensitivity, which can lead to long-term discomfort.
- Closing excerpt
- The volume analysis was performed by applying a new measurement method, which enables, for the first time, the quantification of oral donor site morbidity.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (248 words)
BackgroundPatients undergoing oral mucosa harvesting for urethroplasty may experience several challenges during recovery like scarring or changes in oral sensitivity, which can lead to long-term discomfort. In this retrospective study long-term donor site complications after harvesting of oral mucosa for urethroplasty were evaluated and a new measurement method for oral volume differences between the non-operated and operated sides was applied.MethodsThirty adult male patients who underwent urethroplasty with buccal mucosa grafting were included. At a median of 43 months after surgery, a standardized questionnaire was used, and clinical examinations were conducted to measure the postoperative elasticity of the buccal mucosa. This measurement compared the non-operated side with the operated side. Additionally, we examined descriptive statistics and the influence of smoking status, diabetes mellitus, immunosuppression, alcohol consumption, and graft size.ResultsIn total, 36% of the patients reported persistent subjective postoperative impairments, such as tightness in the oral cavity or numbness. In all patients, a difference in buccal volume was observed between the operated side and the non-operated side. This volume difference ranged from 3 to 15 ml (mean 8.10 ml, SD ± 3.4; p ConclusionsThe use of buccal mucosa grafts for urethroplasty is an established procedure in urology, but the oral harvesting procedure can lead to scarring within the buccal area, which is associated with a statistically significant decrease in buccal volume compared with the non-operated site. The volume analysis was performed by applying a new measurement method, which enables, for the first time, the quantification of oral donor site morbidity.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 40635013 · DOI · PMC12239327
Key reviews and meta-analyses
The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.
- Research article A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Functional Outcomes and Complications Following Transurethral Procedures for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Resulting from Benign Prostatic Obstruction: An Update [5]
- Research article Urethral strictures [6]
- Research article Male Urethral Stricture: American Urological Association Guideline [7]
- Research article Urethral Stricture Disease Guideline Amendment (2023) [8]
- Research article Urethral reconstruction using buccal mucosa or penile skin grafts: systematic review and meta-analysis [9]
- Research article Effectiveness of vesicoamniotic shunt in fetuses with congenital lower urinary tract obstruction: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis [10]
References
- Zeng XT, Jin YH, Liu TZ, Chen FM, Ding DG, Fu M, et al.. Clinical practice guideline for transurethral plasmakinetic resection of prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia (2021 Edition). . 2022. PMID 35361280 · DOI · PMC8974007
- Casarin M, Morlacco A, Dal Moro F. Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine in Pediatric Urology: Urethral and Urinary Bladder Reconstruction. . 2022. PMID 35742803 · DOI · PMC9224288
- Tan Q, Le H, Tang C, Zhang M, Yang W, Hong Y, et al.. Tailor-made natural and synthetic grafts for precise urethral reconstruction. . 2022. PMID 36045428 · DOI · PMC9429763
- Farahzadi S, Buckova M, Witzleben MV, Schröder TA, Lauer G, Korn P. New measurement method for long-term oral complications after harvesting buccal mucosa grafts for urethroplasty. . 2025. PMID 40635013 · DOI · PMC12239327
- Cornu JN, Ahyai S, Bachmann A, de la Rosette J, Gilling P, Gratzke C, et al.. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Functional Outcomes and Complications Following Transurethral Procedures for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Resulting from Benign Prostatic Obstruction: An Update. Eur Urol. 2015. PMID 24972732 · DOI
- Mundy AR, Andrich DE. Urethral strictures. BJU Int. 2011. PMID 21176068 · DOI
- Wessells H, Angermeier KW, Elliott S, Gonzalez CM, Kodama R, Peterson AC, et al.. Male Urethral Stricture: American Urological Association Guideline. J Urol. 2017. PMID 27497791 · DOI
- Wessells H, Morey A, Souter L, Rahimi L, Vanni A. Urethral Stricture Disease Guideline Amendment (2023). J Urol. 2023. PMID 37096574 · DOI
- Lumen N, Oosterlinck W, Hoebeke P. Urethral reconstruction using buccal mucosa or penile skin grafts: systematic review and meta-analysis. Urol Int. 2012. PMID 22889835 · DOI
- Nassr AA, Shazly SAM, Abdelmagied AM, Araujo Júnior E, Tonni G, Kilby MD, et al.. Effectiveness of vesicoamniotic shunt in fetuses with congenital lower urinary tract obstruction: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017. PMID 27270578 · DOI
About this article
- Sources
- NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
- Verification
- Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-11-04; title, year and DOI matched.
- Review state
- automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
- Version
- 1, last updated 2026-11-04.
See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.
Evidence strength
EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.