Skip to main content

Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy in Reconstructive Urology and Urogynecology

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) delivers 100% oxygen at 2.0–2.5 atmospheres absolute (ATA) for 60–120 minutes per session, typically over 30–60 daily sessions. In reconstructive urology and urogynecology, the strongest evidence supports treatment of radiation-induced hemorrhagic cystitis (Level 1 evidence — RICH-ART) and Fournier's gangrene (78% mortality reduction in national data), with emerging evidence for adjunctive use in complex fistula repair, hypospadias reoperations, and radiation-induced vaginal injury.[1][2][3][4][5]

For broader wound-healing context see Wound-Healing Adjuncts and Radiation Tissue Effects. For reconstructive applications see Conservative Management of RUF and Fecal Diversion.

Mechanism of Action​

HBOT exploits Henry's, Dalton's, and Fick's gas laws to dramatically increase dissolved oxygen in plasma, creating steep oxygen gradients from healthy to hypoxic tissue. Therapeutic effects relevant to reconstructive practice:[7][8][9][10]

  • Neoangiogenesis — Marx rabbit model showed 8–9-fold increased vascular density in irradiated tissue vs normobaric oxygen or air; intermittent "on-off" exposures stimulate stem cell mobilization and vasculogenesis[8]
  • Fibroblast activation — enhanced collagen elaboration, deposition, and cross-linking critical for wound healing and graft take[8][9]
  • Anti-inflammatory effects — down-regulation of TNF-α, IL-1, IL-6; up-regulation of VEGF, EGF, PDGF, FGF-2; interference with NF-κB signaling[11][12]
  • Antimicrobial effects — direct bacteriostatic / bactericidal activity against anaerobes, antibiotic potentiation, enhanced leukocyte microbial killing, disruption of bacterial toxin production[9][10][13]
  • Edema reduction — vasoconstriction reduces edema while paradoxically increasing tissue oxygenation[8]
  • HIF-1 stabilization — paradoxical elevation of Hypoxia-Inducible Factor-1 through oxygen-concentration-independent pathways stimulates growth factor production[9]

Standard Protocols​

ParameterTypicalNotes
Pressure2.0–2.5 ATA2.5 ATA may reduce hematuria recurrence in radiation cystitis but increases adverse events[15]
Session duration60–120 min (typically 90)Includes compression / decompression time
FrequencyDaily, 5 d / weekTwice daily for acute conditions (Fournier's)
Total sessions30–60Radiation cystitis 30–40; radiation proctitis 40–60; Fournier's 5–24
ChamberMonoplace or multiplaceMultiplace allows direct medical supervision

Application 1 — Radiation-Induced Hemorrhagic Cystitis (Strongest Evidence)​

The best-established urological indication, supported by the only major RCT.

RICH-ART (Oscarsson 2019, Lancet Oncology) — randomized phase 2–3 trial, n = 79 with late radiation cystitis, HBOT (100% O₂ at 2.4 ATA, 80–90 min, 30–40 sessions) vs standard care. Significant reductions in urinary symptoms (EPIC urinary domain) and improved QoL at 6–8 mo. Macroscopic urothelial improvement. Bowel symptoms also improved — effects are not organ-specific.[1]

RICH-ART 5-year follow-up (Oscarsson 2025, EClinicalMedicine) — sustained benefit at 5 yr, addressing the long-term-evidence objection. 37% lower healthcare costs, 31% fewer endoscopic procedures, 78% fewer blood transfusions, 53% lower mortality vs control.[26]

Yang 2024 meta-analysis (14 studies, 556 patients): 89.9% symptom improvement; 55% complete remission of hematuria (95% CI 51–59%).[27]

Soriano 2026 pressure optimization (n = 93): 2.5 ATA associated with lower rates of gross hematuria within 1 year vs 2.0 ATA (P < 0.05).[15]

ASCRS 2018: Strong recommendation (Grade 1B) for HBOT in chronic radiation proctitis (same pathophysiology as radiation cystitis).[28]

Application 2 — Fournier's Gangrene / Necrotizing Soft-Tissue Infections​

Adjunct to surgical debridement and antibiotics.

Toppen 2024 (NIS, n = 60,481 NSTI 2012–2020):[3]

  • 78% reduced mortality (AOR 0.22, 95% CI 0.09–0.53, P < 0.001) — Hollabaugh data corroborate.[29]

Mindrup 2005 (single institution, n = 42) — no benefit (mortality 26.9% HBOT vs 12.5% non-HBOT), likely selection bias for more severe disease.[30]

Guideline discordance: IDSA recommends against routine HBOT for NSTI; other society guidelines suggest considering it. JAMA Surg 2024: HBOT must never delay surgical debridement nor interfere with ICU support.[31]

Application 3 — Adjunct to Complex Fistula Repair​

Hammad 2026 (Cleveland Clinic matched cohort, 53 HBOT vs 159 controls, complex perineal / RVF / pouch-vaginal):[2]

  • Overall healing 84.9% vs 76.3% (P = 0.18, NS)
  • After stoma reversal: recurrence 5.9% vs 26.5% (P = 0.035)
  • In ≥ 3 prior failed repairs: healing 85% vs 66% (P = 0.04)
  • HBOT cohort had significantly more complex disease

HBOT is most valuable as adjunct in complex, recurrent fistulas that have already failed multiple repairs.

Marguet 2007 — RUF specifically: all 4 patients with radiation-induced RUF failed HBOT; all required major surgical repair. HBOT is not effective as standalone for radiation-induced RUF.[32]

Chan 2014 — extreme persistent perineal sinus after IBD proctectomy (n = 4, median 88.5 mo, 5–35 prior failed procedures): preoperative HBOT (30 sessions) + rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap → 100% complete healing at median 35 mo.[33]

Application 4 — Hypospadias Reoperations (Tissue Conditioning)​

Bush & Snodgrass 2019 — only study examining HBOT in urethral reconstruction; n = 57 reoperative staged tubularized autograft (oral mucosa graft) for failed hypospadias:[4]

  • 20 preoperative + 10 postoperative HBOT sessions for ≥ 3 prior failed repairs
  • Graft contracture: 9% with HBOT vs 26% (P = 0.04)
  • Graft failure (≥ 50% contracture): 6% vs 28% (P = 0.03)
  • HBOT cohort had significantly more prior failed repairs yet better outcomes

Strongest evidence for HBOT as a tissue conditioning adjunct in urethral reconstruction.

Application 5 — Radiation-Induced Vaginal Injury​

Möring 2025 (n = 19 with late radiation tissue injury of the vagina, 40 sessions, 80 min at 2.5 ATA):[5]

  • 79% responders (≥ 1 vaginal symptom improving)
  • Most responsive: ulceration 89%, dyspareunia 82%, pain 71%, stenosis/fibrosis 80%
  • Response maintained at 3 mo in 14/15
  • No major adverse events

Williams 1992 (n = 14 pelvic soft-tissue radiation necrosis after gynecologic malignancy): complete resolution in all patients with vaginal vault necrosis alone or with rectovaginal fistula; both fistula patients underwent defunctioning colostomy + HBOT with resolution and no relapse at 3 yr.[34]

Geldof 2022 SR (21 studies HBOT in gynecologic-cancer LRTI): wound complications benefited most; cystitis and proctitis improved in the majority of studies.[35]

Application 6 — Interstitial Cystitis / Bladder Pain Syndrome​

van Ophoven 2006 RCT (n = 21 IC): HBOT 2.4 ATA × 30 vs sham 1.3 ATA. Only 3/14 (21.4%) responders vs 0/7 controls (P = 0.52, NS); HBOT did produce significant decreases in urgency and pain intensity.[36]

van Ophoven 2004 pilot (n = 6): 4/6 (67%) excellent or good; sustained improvement in capacity, frequency, pain at 12 mo.[37]

Modest, inconsistent benefit — emerging / experimental rather than standard of care.[38][39]

Application 7 — Erectile Dysfunction​

Hadanny 2018 (prospective, n = 30 chronic non-surgical ED, 40 sessions): 88% IIEF improvement; perfusion MRI showed 153% increase in K-trans (angiogenesis marker) in the corpus cavernosum (P < 0.05).[40]

Chiles 2018 RCT (n = 109, post-RP): no significant difference in erectile recovery at 18 mo (IIEF, EPIC-26).[41]

Müller 2008 (rat cavernous nerve injury): ICP/MAP 55% vs 31% (P = 0.005); preserved NGF and eNOS.[42]

Conflicting evidence — promising in non-surgical vasculogenic ED, negative in the only post-RP RCT.

Application 8 — Radiation-Induced Proctitis​

Relevant because radiation proctitis often coexists with radiation cystitis and may contribute to fistula formation.

  • ASCRS 2018: Strong recommendation (Grade 1B) for HBOT to reduce bleeding[28]
  • Oscarsson 2013: symptoms alleviated in 89% (EPIC bowel 48 → 68, P < 0.05)[43]
  • HOT2 (Glover 2016, Lancet Oncol) — only sham-controlled RCT for radiation proctitis: no significant benefit; criticized for underdosing (2.0 ATA vs standard 2.4) and selection[44]
  • Moreira Monteiro 2023 (10-yr cohort, n = 88): 62.5% complete response, 31.8% partial; hematochezia resolution 93.7%[25]

Application 9 — Preoperative Tissue Conditioning​

Emerging concept: HBOT as preoperative "stress conditioning" before reconstructive surgery in irradiated or scarred fields.[12][45][46]

  • HBOT-induced oxidative stress triggers anti-inflammatory cascades, growth factor up-regulation, angiogenesis
  • Boet 2020 SR (13 RCTs, 627 patients) — perioperative HBOT: 10/13 RCTs reported improvement in ≥ 1 outcome; methodological quality limited[45]
  • Persistent perineal sinus — Chan 2014 100% with preoperative HBOT + flap (above)[33]
  • Hypospadias — Bush & Snodgrass 20 preoperative + 10 postoperative[4]

Particularly relevant for pelvic reconstructive surgery in irradiated fields, where tissue hypoxia and fibrosis compromise healing.

Application 10 — Mesh Complications (Urogynecology)​

Single case report — Douso 2009: 45-yr-old with serious postoperative cellulitis involving intrapelvic mesh (polypropylene + porcine acellular) after cystocele/rectocele/SUI repair. HBOT + IV antibiotics → complete recovery with preservation of the surgical repair.[47] No systematic data.

Adverse Effects and Safety​

Adverse effectIncidenceSignificance
Middle-ear barotrauma (otalgia)4–33%Most common; usually self-limiting; tympanostomy for ventilated patients
Temporary myopia20% (> 1 D after 20 sessions)Reversible by ~10 wk post-treatment
ClaustrophobiaMinority11.7% terminate treatment due to side effects
Oxygen-toxicity seizures0.03% (~1/2,000–3,000)Self-terminating when O₂ removed; no long-term seizure risk
Pulmonary oxygen toxicityRare (dose-related)Reversible cough; lung function tests unaffected
Sinus / dental barotraumaExtremely rare0/11,376 in Plafki 2000

Risk factors for adverse events: chamber pressure > 2.0 ATA and treatment courses > 10 sessions.[16]

Absolute contraindications: untreated pneumothorax, concurrent doxorubicin or cisplatin (enhanced toxicity), active viral disease.[48]

Relative contraindications: uncontrolled seizure disorder, severe COPD with CO₂ retention, congestive heart failure, pregnancy, claustrophobia.[48][49]

Cancer safety: Feldmeier 2003 comprehensive review — does not support concerns that HBOT increases tumor incidence or growth rate in patients with prior malignancy.[14]

Cost Considerations​

  • HBOT is expensive — daily hospital charges ~ $3,384/d vs $2,552 without (Fournier's setting).[30]
  • RICH-ART 5-yr follow-up demonstrated 37% lower total healthcare costs in HBOT arm due to fewer endoscopies, transfusions, and hospitalizations.[26]
  • A typical 30–40 session course requires 6–8 weeks of daily treatment — a significant time commitment.

Evidence Hierarchy for Reconstructive Urology / Urogynecology​

ApplicationLevel of evidenceStrengthKey finding
Radiation hemorrhagic cystitisLevel 1 (RCT + 5-yr follow-up)Strong55% complete remission; sustained at 5 yr; cost-effective[1][26][27]
Radiation proctitisLevel 1 (conflicting RCTs)Moderate (ASCRS 1B)89% symptom improvement; HOT2 negative (criticized for underdosing)[28][43][44]
Fournier's gangreneLevel 3 (observational + national)Conditional78% mortality reduction (AOR 0.22); guideline discordance[3][31]
Complex recurrent perineal fistulaLevel 3 (matched cohort)Conditional adjunctLower recurrence after stoma reversal (5.9% vs 26.5%); benefit in ≥ 3 failed repairs[2]
Hypospadias reoperations (graft take)Level 3 (comparative cohort)Conditional adjunctGraft failure 6% vs 28%[4]
Radiation vaginal injuryLevel 4 (retrospective)Conditional79% responders; ulceration / dyspareunia / stenosis most responsive[5]
Interstitial cystitis / BPSLevel 2 (small RCT)Weak / experimental21% responders; modest symptom improvement[36]
ED — non-surgicalLevel 3 (prospective cohort)Experimental88% improvement; penile angiogenesis on MRI[40]
Post-prostatectomy EDLevel 1 (RCT)AgainstNo benefit in only RCT[41]
RUF (standalone)Level 4 (case series)Against as standalone0% success in radiation-induced RUF[32]
Preoperative tissue conditioningLevel 3 (SR of RCTs)Experimental10/13 RCTs showed benefit[45]
Mesh complicationsLevel 5 (case report)InsufficientSingle mesh-preservation case[47]

Key Takeaways​

  1. Radiation hemorrhagic cystitis is the strongest indication — RICH-ART Level 1 with durable 5-yr benefits and cost savings; consider HBOT before invasive interventions like cystectomy.[1][26]
  2. Perioperative HBOT improves graft take in urethral reconstruction (hypospadias reops) — 20 preop + 10 postop sessions reduce graft failure 28% → 6%; concept may extrapolate to other tissue-graft reconstructions in scarred fields.[4]
  3. Complex, recurrent fistulas (RVF, pouch-vaginal, perianal) benefit adjunctively — particularly with ≥ 3 prior failed repairs.[2]
  4. HBOT is not effective as standalone treatment for radiation-induced RUF and should not delay definitive surgical repair.[32]
  5. Preoperative tissue conditioning before pelvic reconstruction in irradiated fields is a promising but unproven concept warranting further study.[12][45][46]
  6. Radiation-induced vaginal injury (stenosis, dyspareunia, ulceration) responds well — 79–100% improvement makes HBOT valuable in urogynecologic survivorship care.[5][34]
  7. Fournier's gangrene — adjunct that must never delay surgical debridement; national data support mortality reduction despite mixed guidelines.[3][31]

See also​

References​

1. Oscarsson N, Müller B, Rosén A, et al. "Radiation-induced cystitis treated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (RICH-ART): a randomised, controlled, phase 2-3 trial." Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(11):1602–1614. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30494-2

2. Hammad AF, Erkaya M, Hull TL, et al. "Impact of hyperbaric oxygen therapy on complex perineal fistula healing." Colorectal Dis. 2026;28(3):e70398. doi:10.1111/codi.70398

3. Toppen W, Cho NY, Sareh S, et al. "Contemporary national outcomes of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in necrotizing soft tissue infections." PLoS One. 2024;19(3):e0300738. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0300738

4. Bush N, Snodgrass W. "Hyperbaric oxygen therapy improves oral graft take in hypospadias staged tubularized autograft reoperations." J Urol. 2019;202(3):617–622. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000000145

5. Möring MM, Valkenburg AC, Schuur-Van't Hof N, van Beekhuizen HJ, Lansdorp CA. "Reduced symptoms of late radiation tissue injury of the vagina after treatment with hyperbaric oxygen therapy: a retrospective analysis of 19 patients." Gynecol Oncol. 2025;197:27–33. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2025.04.003

7. Tejada S, Batle JM, Ferrer MD, et al. "Therapeutic effects of hyperbaric oxygen in the process of wound healing." Curr Pharm Des. 2019;25(15):1682–1693. doi:10.2174/1381612825666190703162648

8. Kranke P, Bennett MH, Martyn-St James M, et al. "Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for chronic wounds." Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(6):CD004123. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004123.pub4

9. Růžička J, Dejmek J, Bolek L, Beneš J, Kuncová J. "Hyperbaric oxygen influences chronic wound healing — a cellular level review." Physiol Res. 2021;70(S3):S261–S273. doi:10.33549/physiolres.934822

10. Tanaka T, Minami A, Uchida J, Nakatani T. "Potential of hyperbaric oxygen in urological diseases." Int J Urol. 2019;26(9):860–867. doi:10.1111/iju.14015

11. Dhamodharan U, Karan A, Sireesh D, et al. "Tissue-specific role of Nrf2 in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers during hyperbaric oxygen therapy." Free Radic Biol Med. 2019;138:53–62. doi:10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2019.04.031

12. De Wolde SD, Hulskes RH, Weenink RP, Hollmann MW, Van Hulst RA. "The effects of hyperbaric oxygenation on oxidative stress, inflammation and angiogenesis." Biomolecules. 2021;11(8):1210. doi:10.3390/biom11081210

13. Gregory TJ, Sethuraman K. "The role of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in management of necrotizing soft tissue infection." J Clin Med. 2025;14(10):3511. doi:10.3390/jcm14103511

14. Lin ZC, Bennett MH, Hawkins GC, et al. "Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for late radiation tissue injury." Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023;8:CD005005. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005005.pub5

15. Soriano VH, Laspro M, Lee WY, et al. "Outcomes of hyperbaric oxygen therapy at 2.0 versus 2.5 ATA for hemorrhagic radiation cystitis." Neurourol Urodyn. 2026;45(3):446–452. doi:10.1002/nau.70221

16. Zhang Y, Zhou Y, Jia Y, Wang T, Meng D. "Adverse effects of hyperbaric oxygen therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis." Front Med. 2023;10:1160774. doi:10.3389/fmed.2023.1160774

25. Moreira Monteiro A, Alpuim Costa D, Mareco V, Espiney Amaro C. "The effectiveness of hyperbaric oxygen therapy for managing radiation-induced proctitis — results of a 10-year retrospective cohort study." Front Oncol. 2023;13:1235237. doi:10.3389/fonc.2023.1235237

26. Oscarsson N, Rosén A, Müller B, et al. "Radiation-induced cystitis treated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy (RICH-ART): long-term follow-up of a randomised controlled, phase 2-3 trial." EClinicalMedicine. 2025;83:103214. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103214

27. Yang TK, Wang YJ, Li HJ, et al. "Efficacy and safety of hyperbaric oxygen therapy for radiation-induced hemorrhagic cystitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis." J Clin Med. 2024;13(16):4724. doi:10.3390/jcm13164724

28. Paquette IM, Vogel JD, Abbas MA, Feingold DL, Steele SR. "The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of chronic radiation proctitis." Dis Colon Rectum. 2018;61(10):1135–1140. doi:10.1097/DCR.0000000000001209

29. Hollabaugh RS, Dmochowski RR, Hickerson WL, Cox CE. "Fournier's gangrene: therapeutic impact of hyperbaric oxygen." Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998;101(1):94–100. doi:10.1097/00006534-199801000-00016

30. Mindrup SR, Kealey GP, Fallon B. "Hyperbaric oxygen for the treatment of Fournier's gangrene." J Urol. 2005;173(6):1975–1977. doi:10.1097/01.ju.0000158129.56571.05

31. McDermott J, Kao LS, Keeley JA, et al. "Necrotizing soft tissue infections: a review." JAMA Surg. 2024;159(11):1308–1315. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2024.3365

32. Marguet C, Raj GV, Brashears JH, et al. "Rectourethral fistula after combination radiotherapy for prostate cancer." Urology. 2007;69(5):898–901. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2007.01.044

33. Chan XH, Koh CE, Glover M, et al. "Healing under pressure: hyperbaric oxygen and myocutaneous flap repair for extreme persistent perineal sinus after proctectomy for inflammatory bowel disease." Colorectal Dis. 2014;16(3):186–190. doi:10.1111/codi.12500

34. Williams JA, Clarke D, Dennis WA, Dennis EJ, Smith ST. "The treatment of pelvic soft tissue radiation necrosis with hyperbaric oxygen." Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;167(2):412–415. doi:10.1016/s0002-9378(11)91421-5

35. Geldof NI, van Hulst RA, Ridderikhof ML, Teguh DN. "Hyperbaric oxygen treatment for late radiation-induced tissue toxicity in treated gynaecological cancer patients: a systematic review." Radiat Oncol. 2022;17(1):164. doi:10.1186/s13014-022-02067-6

36. van Ophoven A, Rossbach G, Pajonk F, Hertle L. "Safety and efficacy of hyperbaric oxygen therapy for the treatment of interstitial cystitis: a randomized, sham controlled, double-blind trial." J Urol. 2006;176(4 Pt 1):1442–1446. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2006.06.065

37. van Ophoven A, Rossbach G, Oberpenning F, Hertle L. "Hyperbaric oxygen for the treatment of interstitial cystitis: long-term results of a prospective pilot study." Eur Urol. 2004;46(1):108–113. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2004.03.002

38. Imamura M, Scott NW, Wallace SA, et al. "Interventions for treating people with symptoms of bladder pain syndrome: a network meta-analysis." Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;7:CD013325. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD013325.pub2

39. Neuhaus J, Schwalenberg T. "Intravesical treatments of bladder pain syndrome / interstitial cystitis." Nat Rev Urol. 2012;9(12):707–720. doi:10.1038/nrurol.2012.217

40. Hadanny A, Lang E, Copel L, et al. "Hyperbaric oxygen can induce angiogenesis and recover erectile function." Int J Impot Res. 2018;30(6):292–299. doi:10.1038/s41443-018-0023-9

41. Chiles KA, Staff I, Johnson-Arbor K, et al. "A double-blind, randomized trial on the efficacy and safety of hyperbaric oxygenation therapy in the preservation of erectile function after radical prostatectomy." J Urol. 2018;199(3):805–811. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2017.10.016

42. Müller A, Tal R, Donohue JF, et al. "The effect of hyperbaric oxygen therapy on erectile function recovery in a rat cavernous nerve injury model." J Sex Med. 2008;5(3):562–570. doi:10.1111/j.1743-6109.2007.00727.x

43. Oscarsson N, Arnell P, Lodding P, Ricksten SE, Seeman-Lodding H. "Hyperbaric oxygen treatment in radiation-induced cystitis and proctitis: a prospective cohort study on patient-perceived quality of recovery." Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;87(4):670–675. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.07.039

44. Glover M, Smerdon GR, Andreyev HJ, et al. "Hyperbaric oxygen for patients with chronic bowel dysfunction after pelvic radiotherapy (HOT2): a randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled phase 3 trial." Lancet Oncol. 2016;17(2):224–233. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00461-1

45. Boet S, Martin L, Cheng-Boivin O, et al. "Can preventive hyperbaric oxygen therapy optimise surgical outcome? A systematic review of randomised controlled trials." Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2020;37(8):636–648. doi:10.1097/EJA.0000000000001219

46. Perdrizet GA. "Preoperative stress conditioning in humans: is oxygen the drug of choice?" Adv Exp Med Biol. 2016;876:223–231. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-3023-4_28

47. Douso ML. "Hyperbaric oxygen therapy as adjunctive treatment for postoperative cellulitis involving intrapelvic mesh." J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2009;16(2):222–223. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2008.12.007

48. Capelli-Schellpfeffer M, Gerber GS. "The use of hyperbaric oxygen in urology." J Urol. 1999;162(3 Pt 1):647–654. doi:10.1097/00005392-199909010-00002

49. Klakeel M, Kowalske K. "The role of hyperbaric oxygen therapy for the treatment of wounds. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2022;33(4):823–832. doi:10.1016/j.pmr.2022.06.008