Search

Purpose: Reconstruction of complex functional structures is increasingly being performed with vascularized composite allotransplantation. Penile transplantation is a novel vascularized composite allotransplantation treatment option for severe penile tissue loss and disfigurement. Three allogeneic human penile transplantations have been reported. We review these cases as well as penile transplant indications, preclinical models and immunosuppression therapy., Materials and Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature review for the years 1970 to 2016 via MEDLINE®, PubMed® and Google with the key words "penis transplantation," "penile rejection," "penile replantation," "penile tissue loss" and "penis vascularized composite allotransplantation." Relevant articles, including original research, reviews and nonscientific press reports, were selected based on contents, and a review of this literature was generated., Results: Three human allogeneic penile transplantations have been performed to date, of which 1 was removed 14 days after transplantation. The second recipient reports natural spontaneous erections and impregnating his partner. All 3 patients were able to void spontaneously through the graft's urethra. The complexity of the transplant is determined by how proximally the penile shaft anastomosis is performed and additional pelvic tissue may be transplanted en bloc if needed., Conclusions: Penile transplantation is a technically demanding procedure with significant ethical and psychosocial implications that can provide tissue and functional replacement, including urinary diversion and natural erections. It is unclear how rejection and immunosuppression may affect graft function. Better models and more preclinical research are needed to better understand and optimize penile transplantation., (Copyright © 2017 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Several studies have documented that increased biopsy sampling, that is 6 versus 12 biopsy cores, can detect more prostate cancer. It is unknown whether increased sampling of the prostate will detect a higher number of potentially insignificant tumors., Materials and Methods: We searched the surgical pathology files at The Johns Hopkins Hospital for patients in whom prostate needle biopsy was performed by a single urologist between April 1993 and April 2000, and subsequently underwent radical prostatectomy. Patients who underwent radical prostatectomy and had 8 core biopsies or less between March 1994 and August 1999 were also studied. Clinically significant tumors were defined as those with volume greater than 0.5 cc, Gleason score 7 or greater or nonorgan confined disease., Results: A total of 297 patients with a mean age of 60 years (range 36 to 75) were evaluated. Group 1 consisted of 107 men with 8 core biopsies or less, including 51 with 6, and group 2 comprised 190 men with 9 cores or greater, including 145 with 12. The 2 groups were equal in regard to prostate specific antigen, age, digital rectal examination and transrectal ultrasound gland volume at biopsy. The only difference between the groups was a higher number of cores with cancer in group 2 (mean 2.8 versus 2.1, p = 0.0006). Of the patients who underwent radical prostatectomy 59.6% had Gleason score 6 or less, 26.3% 3+4, 6.7% 4+3 and 7.4% 8 to 9. There were 12.4% of patients with positive margins, 36.4% extraprostatic extension, and 5.4% seminal vesicle invasion and/or lymph node metastasis. Tumor volumes averaged 1.1 cc (range 0.01 to 10.7) and 60.9% of tumors were greater than 0.5 cc. Clinically significant tumors were seen in 77.4% of patients in group 1 and 74.6% in group 2. There was no significant difference in Gleason score, margin status, tumor volume, seminal vesicle invasion, or lymph node metastasis between groups 1 and 2, or in a subset analysis of men with 6 versus 12 core biopsies. However, patients in whom cancer was diagnosed with 9 core biopsies or greater were more likely to have organ confined disease (p = 0.02)., Conclusions: Although increased sampling of the prostate does not increase the detection of potentially insignificant tumors, it does appear to detect earlier stage cancer.