Skip to main content

MANTA Urethroplasty (Mucomucosal Anastomotic Non-Transecting Augmentation)

The MANTA urethroplastyMucomucosal Anastomotic Non-Transecting Augmentation — is a non-transecting bulbar urethroplasty described by Marks, Dahlem, and Janisch in 2023 (Hamburg) for bulbar strictures ≥2 cm with a focal obliterative segment ≤1.5 cm. It combines a dorsal mucomucosal anastomosis at the obliterative core with a ventral onlay BMG, all approached ventrally and preserving the corpus spongiosum.[1]

For the broader non-transecting family, see Non-Transecting Bulbar Urethroplasty, ANTA, MsANTA / Joshi Step, and ntAAU. For the transecting alternative, see Augmented Anastomotic Urethroplasty. For graft material, see Buccal Mucosa Graft.


Concept and Rationale

MANTA was developed for a specific anatomic problem: the bulbar stricture that contains a short obliterative core (≤1.5 cm) within a longer overall stricture (≥2 cm).[1]

  • Pure EPA / VS-EPA would not span the longer surrounding narrowing.
  • Pure dorsal onlay BMG cannot reconstruct the obliterative core.
  • Transecting AAU carries the Redmond / Rourke 2020 HR 4.8 recurrence signal compared with pure dorsal onlay.[2]
  • MANTA anastomoses the dorsal mucosa across the obliterative segment without transecting the spongiosum, then augments the entire strictured length with a ventral onlay graft.[1]

The result — circumferential reconstruction without spongiosal transection, preserving the bulbar arteries and communicant vessels.[3][4]


Indications

  • Bulbar strictures ≥2 cm total length with a focal obliterative segment ≤1.5 cm[1]
  • Penobulbar location is feasible (30% of the original Marks 2023 cohort)
  • Redo cases (26% of the Marks 2023 cohort)
  • Patients in whom preservation of the spongiosum is prioritized to reduce sexual dysfunction[3][5]

Contraindications / limitations

  • Obliterative segment >1.5 cm — too long for safe dorsal mucomucosal anastomosis
  • Lichen sclerosus
  • Strictures suitable for pure dorsal onlay BMG (where transection / anastomosis is not needed)

Surgical Technique

Step 1 — Ventral approach. Stricture approached ventrally to avoid extensive dorsal mobilization. A perineal midline incision is made; the corpus spongiosum is exposed without transection.

Step 2 — Ventral urethrotomy. A ventral midline urethrotomy is performed through the strictured segment, opening the lumen for direct visualization.

Step 3 — Dorsal scar excision (superficial). At the level of the obliterative core, the dorsal scar is superficially excised while the spongiosum is left intact (non-transecting). Healthy dorsal mucosal edges are exposed proximal and distal to the obliterative segment.

Step 4 — Dorsal mucomucosal anastomosis. The healthy dorsal mucosal edges are brought together in a dorsal mucomucosal anastomosis — the "anastomotic" half of the technique. This is feasible because the obliterative segment is ≤1.5 cm.

Step 5 — Ventral onlay BMG. A buccal mucosal graft is placed as a ventral onlay to augment the entire strictured segment (including the just-anastomosed dorsal core) — the "augmentation" half of the technique. The graft is sutured to the ventral urethrotomy edges with absorbable sutures (5-0 / 6-0 PDS or Vicryl).

Step 6 — Closure. The corpus spongiosum is closed over the graft (spongioplasty); bulbospongiosus muscle and perineal tissues approximated. 16–18 Fr urethral catheter placed for 2–3 weeks.

The result is a neourethra of triangular cross-section — dorsal mucomucosal anastomosis + ventral graft — without spongiosal transection.[1]


Outcomes — Marks 2023 Hamburg Series

ParameterResult
Number of patients54
Median follow-up41 months
Stricture inclusion criteria≥2 cm with obliterative segment ≤1.5 cm
Penobulbar location30%
Redo cases26%
Functional success93%
LUTS score (pre → post)13 → 3.5 (p < 0.001)
IIEF-EF (pre → post)27 → 24 (NS, p ≥ 0.4)
Patient satisfaction100%
[1]

MANTA vs. Other Non-Transecting Variants

FeatureVS-EPA / ntEPA[3]ANTA[6]MsANTA[7]MANTA[1]ntAAU[8]
Year20072012202220232025
SpongiosumPreservedPreservedPreservedPreservedPreserved
MucosaExcisedExcisedPreserved (incised, not excised)Dorsal scar superficially excisedExcised
ApproachDorsal or ventralDorsalDorsal or ventralVentralDorsal
GraftNoneDorsal onlay BMGOnlay BMGVentral onlay BMGDorsal onlay BMG
AnastomosisMucosa-to-mucosaMucosalMucosalDorsal mucomucosal at obliterative coreMucosal
Ideal strictureShort ≤2 cm>2 cm with obliterative coreNarrowed but non-obliterated≥2 cm with obliterative ≤1.5 cmObliterative >2 cm
Success90–98%93%preliminary (small cohort)93%90.5%

Why MANTA Matters

Redmond / Rourke 2020 (n = 507) demonstrated that transecting augmented anastomotic urethroplasty (AAU) was independently associated with stricture recurrence (HR 4.8, p = 0.002) compared to pure non-transecting dorsal onlay.[2] MANTA addresses the same anatomic indication as transecting AAU — but without transection — and demonstrates 93% functional success at intermediate follow-up.[1] For the broader non-transecting evidence base (Chapman 2019 sexual-dysfunction signal,[5] Oszczudlowski 2023 meta-analysis,[4] Scandinavian RCT), see the umbrella Non-Transecting Bulbar Urethroplasty article.


Key Takeaways

  • MANTA is the most recently described niche technique for the specific scenario of bulbar strictures ≥2 cm with an obliterative segment ≤1.5 cm.
  • Ventral approach with dorsal mucomucosal anastomosis + ventral onlay BMG — circumferential reconstruction without spongiosal transection.
  • 93% functional success in 54 patients at median 41 months; no significant change in IIEF-EF; 100% patient satisfaction.[1]
  • Versatile — successfully used in 26% redo cases and 30% penobulbar strictures.
  • Sits alongside ANTA, MsANTA, and ntAAU as variants of the augmented non-transecting concept; differentiated by ventral approach + dorsal mucomucosal anastomosis configuration.

Videos

Non-Transecting Anastomotic Bulbar Urethroplasty
Philippine Urological Association

References

  1. Marks P, Dahlem R, Janisch F, et al. Mucomucosal anastomotic non-transecting augmentation (MANTA) urethroplasty: a ventral modification for obliterative strictures. BJU Int. 2023;132(4):444-451. doi:10.1111/bju.16112.
  2. Redmond EJ, Hoare DT, Rourke KF. Augmented anastomotic urethroplasty is independently associated with failure after reconstruction for long bulbar urethral strictures. J Urol. 2020;204(5):989-995. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000001177.
  3. Jordan GH, Eltahawy EA, Virasoro R. The technique of vessel sparing excision and primary anastomosis for proximal bulbous urethral reconstruction. J Urol. 2007;177(5):1799-802. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2007.01.036.
  4. Oszczudlowski M, Yepes C, Dobruch J, Martins FE. Outcomes of transecting versus non-transecting urethroplasty for bulbar urethral stricture: a meta-analysis. BJU Int. 2023;132(3):252-261. doi:10.1111/bju.16108.
  5. Chapman DW, Cotter K, Johnsen NV, et al. Nontransecting techniques reduce sexual dysfunction after anastomotic bulbar urethroplasty: results of a multi-institutional comparative analysis. J Urol. 2019;201(2):364-370. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2018.09.051.
  6. Welk BK, Kodama RT. The augmented nontransected anastomotic urethroplasty for the treatment of bulbar urethral strictures. Urology. 2012;79(4):917-21. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2011.12.008.
  7. Joshi P, Bandini M, Kulkarni SB. Mucosal-sparing augmented non-transected anastomotic (MsANTA) urethroplasty: a step forward in ANTA urethroplasty. BJU Int. 2022;130(1):133-136. doi:10.1111/bju.15734.
  8. Baudry A, Schirmann A, Guillot-Tantay C, et al. Non-transecting anastomotic augmented urethroplasty with dorsal onlay buccal graft for the treatment of bulbous urethral strictures: results and complications. World J Urol. 2025;43(1):238. doi:10.1007/s00345-025-05633-1.