Objective To compare the treatment effect between Duply combined with Duckett and Koyanagi surgical methods in severe hypospadias.Methods Forty-two cases of severe hypospadias were divided into two groups according to the surgical method,23 cases was enrolled in Duply combined with Duckett group while 19 cases in Koyanagi group.The operation time,the incidence rate of urinary fistula,urethral stricture,urethral diverticulum and penis torsion were compared.Results The operation time between two groups had no significant difference (P ＞ 0.05).The incidence rate of urinary fistula,urethral stricture,urethral diverticulum and penis torsion between two groups had no significant difference (x2 =0.04,0.31,0.03,1.16,P ＞ 0.05).The total incidence rate of complications between Duply combined with Duckett group and Koyanagi group had significant difference [69.6％ (16/23) vs.6/19] (x2 =4.59,P ＜ 0.05).Conclusion Each of the two methods can be a choice in treatment of severe hypospadias.

Objective To classify the types of hepatic vein and to measure their corresponding liver venous drainage volumes based on analysis of data obtained from a computer-assisted surgery system with an aim to provide an anatomical basis on individualized anatomical hepatectomy.Methods Thin-layer computed tomography (CT) imaging on 570 patients were reconstructed using the Hisense CAS.The types of hepatic vein were classified according to their anatomical variations.The margins of the hemilivers or sectors and their corresponding hepatic venous drainage volumes were displayed.Results The major hepatic veins were classified into three types:Type Ⅰ (270/570,47.4％),type Ⅱ (294/570,51.6％),and type Ⅲ (6/570,1.0％).The left hepatic vein (LHV) was classified as type Ⅰ in 190/570 (33.3％),type Ⅱ in 79/570 (13.9％),and type Ⅲ in 301/570 (52.8％).The middle hepatic vein (MHV) was classified as type Ⅰ in313/570 (54.9％),type Ⅱ in 174/570 (30.5％),and type Ⅲ in 83/570 (14.6％).The right hepatic vein (RHV) was classified as type Ⅰ in 456/570 (80.0％),type Ⅱ in 79/570 (13.9％),and type Ⅲ in 35/570 (6.1％).Type Ⅰ was further classified into four subtypes of A (26/456,5.7％),B (404/456,88.6％),C (20/456,4.4％),and D (6/456,1.3％).The LHV volume was (25.0± 6.6) ％,the MHV volume was (34.8 ± 9.5) ％ and the RHV volume was (25.1 ± 11.6) ％ in 63 patients with inferior right hepatic veins (IRHV).The IRHV and other branches volumes were (14.7 ± 7.4) ％.The RHV volume was (40.7 ± 8.6) ％ in 68 patients without IRHV.Conclusions Hepatic venous variations are complex.Significant differences existed in the hepatic venous drainage volumes.The Hisense CAS clearly delineated the relationship between the intrahepatic vascular structures and the liver carcinoma which hopefully can lead to improvement in the success rate of complex hepatectomy.