Purpose: To evaluate the histological characteristics of buccal mucosa samples prepared using different dissection techniques. Methods: The buccal mucosae harvested from 9 men submitted to a substitution urethroplasty were used in this study. Biopsy specimens of buccal mucosae were grouped according to the macroscopic appearance after dissection: Group 1 – yellowish appearance (minimal dissection), Group 2 – whitish appearance (more aggressive dissection), and Group 3 – translucent appearance (ultra-aggressive dissection). The biopsy specimens were evaluated using histomorphometric techniques. The thicknesses of the graft, epithelium, and sub-epithelial connective tissue were compared. Results: The samples from Group 3 and Groups 2 and 3 presented lower total and lower sub-epithelial connective tissue thickness, respectively, when compared with Group 1. The epithelial thickness was not affected by the dissection method. Muscular and adipose tissues were present in 77 and 55% of samples from Group 1, respectively, whereas these were observed in 44 and 22% of samples from Group 2 respectively. The muscular tissue was observed in 11% of the cases, and the adipose tissue was not observed in samples prepared with ultra-aggressive dissection. Conclusion: We conclude that an intermediate graft dissection (whitish appearance, as performed in Group 2) presents the best balance between subepithelial connective tissue preservation and adipose and muscle tissue removal.

Keywords:
Buccal mucosa, Graft, Urethra, Urethroplatsy
1.
Pandey A, Barta-Kelemen AM, Borisenkov M, Keller H: The staged urethroplasty with vascularised scrotal flap and buccal mucosa graft after failed hypospadias surgery: a reliable technique with a novel tool. Urol Int 2017; 99: 36–42.
2.
Markiewicz MR, Margarone III JE, Guido B, Scannapieco FA: Oral mucosa harvest: an overview of anatomic and biologic considerations. EAU-EBU Update Series 2007; 5: 179–187.
3.
Simonato A, Gregori A, Ambruosi C, Venzano F, Varca V, Romagnoli A, Carmignani G: Lingual mucosal graft urethroplasty for anterior urethral reconstruction. Eur Urol 2008; 54: 79–85.
4.
Bechara GR, de Souza DB, Simoes M, Felix-Patricio B, Medeiros JL Jr, Costa WS, Sampaio FJ: Testicular morphology and spermatozoid parameters in spontaneously hypertensive rats treated with enalapril. J Urol 2015; 194: 1498–1503.
5.
Simoes M, de Souza DB, Gallo CB, Pereira-Sampaio MA, Costa WS, Sampaio FJ: Histomorphometric comparison of the human, swine, and ovine collecting systems. Anat Rec (Hoboken) 2016; 299: 967–972.
6.
Humby G: A one-stage operation for hypospadias. Br J Surg 1941; 29: 84–92.
7.
Burger RA, Muller SC, el-Damanhoury H, Tschakaloff A, Riedmiller H, Hohenfellner R: The buccal mucosal graft for urethral reconstruction: a preliminary report. J Urol 1992; 147: 662–664.
8.
Dessanti A, Rigamonti W, Merulla V, Falchetti D, Caccia G: Autologous buccal mucosa graft for hypospadias repair: an initial report. J Urol 1992; 147: 1081–1083; discussion 1083–1084.
9.
Duckett JW, Coplen D, Ewalt D, Baskin LS: Buccal mucosal urethral replacement. J Urol 1995; 153: 1660–1663.
10.
Gordon HP, Sullivan HC, Atkins JH: Free autogenous gingival grafts. II. Supplemental findings – histology of the graft site. Periodontics 1968; 6: 130–133.
11.
Nanci A: Ten Cate’s Oral Histology: Development, Structure, and Function, (ed 8). St. Louis, Elsevier, 2013.
12.
Vandana KL, Savitha B: Thickness of gingiva in association with age, gender and dental arch location. J Clin Periodontol 2005; 32: 828–830.
13.
Engeland CG, Bosch JA, Cacioppo JT, Marucha PT: Mucosal wound healing: the roles of age and sex. Arch Surg 2006; 141: 1193–1197; discussion 1198.
14.
Karring T, Ostergaard E, Loe H: Conservation of tissue specificity after heterotopic transplantation of gingiva and alveolar mucosa. J Periodontal Res 1971; 6: 282–293.
15.
Presland RB, Dale BA: Epithelial structural proteins of the skin and oral cavity: function in health and disease. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 2000; 11: 383–408.
© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel
2018
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.