Efficacy of MAGPI procedure in the management of hypospadias


  • Ravindra G. Khasnis Department of Pediatric Surgery, Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, Hubli, Karnataka, India
  • Rajshankar S. Department of Pediatric Surgery, Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, Hubli, Karnataka, India




Congenital defect, Hypospadias, Pediatric, Surgery, Urologist


Background: Hypospadias is a relatively common congenital defect of male external genitalia. It is present in approximately 1 in 300 males new born. The meatus may be located anywhere along the shaft of the penis from glans to scrotum or even perineum. The objective is to study the efficacy of MAGPI procedure in the management of hypospadias.

Methods: Detailed case study was done as per the proforma, in majority of cases patient’s mother were informants, thorough clinical examination was done in all cases and looked for any congenital anomalies and family history was also taken, and any drugs intake was also taken. All the cases routine investigation was done like (Hb, BT, Ct, Wt). USG was done in required cases. Routine pre-operative preparation was done like keeping nil orally, preparing parts was done. The type of surgery for each patient was assessed after clinical examination of location of meatus: Anterior, Middle, and Posterior. On discharge, the patients and mothers were advised to bring their children for regular check up to hospital.

Results: Most common position of hypospadias was glanular and coronal. The most common surgery performed was Snodgrass technique and for distal and mid penile hypospadias and MAGPI for glanular type of hypospadias. MAGPI procedure was most commonly performed for glanular and coronal type of hypospadias. Other minor Complication was wound infection and penile torsion of mild degree and was managed conservatively.

Conclusions: There is significant difference in outcome of hypospadias surgery done by pediatric urologist and other surgeons.


Mingin G, Baskin LS. Management of chordee in children and young adults. Urol Clinics North Am. 2002;29:277-84.

Kraft KH, Shukla AR, Canning DA. Hypospadias. Urol Clinics North Am. 2010;37:167-81.

Hunt H, Mchale S. Psychological aspects of hypospadias. Endocrinol Metab Clinics North Am. 2007;36:521-31.

Ozturk H, Rehmanonen A, Otcu S, Kaya M, Ozturk M. The outcome of one stage hypospadias repair. J Pediatric Urol. 2005;1:261-6.

Gatti JM. Disorders of sexual differentiation. In: Holcomb III GN, Murphy JP, eds. Ashcraft’s Pediatric Surgery. 5th ed. Elsevier:New York; 2010: 805-816.

Carlson WH, Kisely SR, MacLellan DL. Maternal and fetal risk factors associated with severity of hypospadias: a comparison of mild and severe cases. J Pediatr Urol. 2009;5(4):283-6.

Ducketts JW. MAGPI (meatoplasty and glanuloplasty): a procedure for sub coronal hypospadias. Urol Clin North Am. 1981;8(3):513-9.

Shapiro SR. Complication of hypospadias repair. J Urol. 1983;131:518-22.

Morrocco G, Vallsciani S, Fiocca G, Calisti A. Hypospadias Surgery 10 Year Review. Pediatr Surg Int. 2004;20:200-3.

Doltazas T, Chiotopoulous D, Antipas S, Demitiades D, Ipsilantis S. Hypospadias repair: review of 250 cases. Pediatr Surg Int. 1994;9:383-6.

Singh M, Jawadi MH, Arya LS. Congenital malformation at birth in Afghanistan. Indian J Pediatr. 1982;49:331-5.

Bhupendra, Singh P, Solanki FS, Kapoor R, Dassi V, Kaswan HK, et al. Factors predicting success in hypospadias. J Urol. 2010;76(1):92-6.

Shukla AR, Patel RP, Canning DA. Hypospadias. Urol Clinics North Am. 2004;31:445-60.

Awad MM, Tolba AM, Saad KM, Zaghlol MR, Rozigque AE, Gharib OH, et al. What is the best choice for repair of distal penile hypospadias: The tubularized incised plate urethroplasty or anterior urethral advancement technique?. Indian J Plast Surg. 2007;40(2):182-8.






Original Research Articles