Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1280842
A Case of Congenital Prepubic Sinus
Publication History
Publication Date:
21 July 2011 (online)
Introduction
Congenital prepubic sinus (CPS) is an infrequently seen, congenital anomaly forming a tract that communicates between the skin overlying the symphysis pubis, superior to the base of the penis or clitoris, and which usually extends back to the anterior wall of the bladder or umbilicus [1]. The etiology of CPS is not fully established yet. This lesion was first reported by Campbell [2]. He suggested that these tracts may represent a localized failure of midline fusion of the lower abdominal wall [2]. Others have reported that their cases may represent a variant of epispadiac urethral duplication [1] [3] [4] [5] [6]. CPS and urethral duplications were suggested to be related embryologically [5]. This proposal has not been fully established yet. Moreover, CPS was not associated with other congenital genitourinary anomalies.
-
References
- 1 Green JSA, Madden NP. Congenital prepubic sinus: a form of dorsal duplication?. BJU Int 1997; 80: 964
- 2 Campbell J, Beasley S, Mcmullin N et al. Congenital prepubic sinus: possible variant of dorsal urethral duplication (Stephens Type 2). J Urol 1987; 137: 505-506
- 3 Kim HY, Shin OK, Jang ED et al. Congenital prepubic sinus: a variant of urethral duplication. Korean J Urol 2007; 48: 881-884
- 4 Balster S, Bettendorf O, Brinkmann OA et al. Congenital prepubic sinus: etiology and therapy. Aktuelle Urol 2003; 34: 484-487
- 5 Komura J, Yano H, Kanazawa M et al. Congenital prepubic sinus. Pediatr Surg Int 1994; 9: 287-289
- 6 Uygun İ, Keleşoğlu Sİ, İşler B et al. Congenital pubic sinus: a kind of dorsal urethral duplication: case report. ŞEH Tıp Bülteni 2008; 42: 19-21
- 7 Stephens FD. Abnormal embryology-cloacal dysgenesis. In: Congenital Malformations of the Urinary Tract. part 1. New York: Praeger Scientific; 1983. 22.
- 8 Huang CC, Wu WS, Chai CY et al. Congenital prepubic sinus: a variant of dorsal urethral duplication suggested by immunohistochemical analysis. J Urol 2001; 166: 1876-1879