1. Extravasation of contrast beneath the preputial skin due to improper technique of retrograde urethrogram
- Author
-
Siddharth Pandey, Deepanshu Sharma, Gaurav Garg, and Ajay Aggarwal
- Subjects
Male ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Meatus ,Images In… ,Provisional diagnosis ,Foreskin ,Distal Urethra ,030232 urology & nephrology ,Contrast Media ,Guidelines as Topic ,urologic and male genital diseases ,Young Adult ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Urethra ,medicine ,Humans ,Preputial skin ,Urethral Stricture ,medicine.diagnostic_test ,business.industry ,Urography ,General Medicine ,Phimosis ,Extravasation ,Surgery ,Treatment Outcome ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,Retrograde urethrogram ,Clinical Competence ,business ,Penis ,Extravasation of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Materials - Abstract
A 22-year-old uncircumcised male patient had a thin stream of urine and had to exert pressure while voiding. He had a history of some instrumentation in his penis during childhood, but no records were available. He was first seen by a primary care physician, who made a provisional diagnosis of stricture urethra and advised for a retrograde urethrogram (RUG). His RUG had a contrast shadow, which was thought to be possible dilated distal urethra due to proximal obstruction (stricture), and the patient was referred to us for further management (figure 1). When we examined the patient, he was found to have phimosis. A dorsal slit was done and the meatus was examined, which was normal. A gentle …
- Published
- 2018