Search

PURPOSE To generate and present the survey results on critical issues relevant to screening, diagnosis, and staging tools for prostate cancer (PCa) focused on developing countries. METHODS A total of 36 of 300 questions concern the main areas of interest of this paper: (1) screening, (2) diagnosis, and (3) staging for various risk levels of PCa in developing countries. A panel of 99 international multidisciplinary cancer experts voted on these questions to create recommendations for screening, diagnosing, and staging tools for PCa in areas of limited resources discussed in this manuscript. RESULTS The panel voted publicly but anonymously on the predefined questions. Each question was deemed consensus if 75% or more of the full panel had selected a particular answer. These answers are based on panelist opinion not a literature review or meta-analysis. For questions that refer to an area of limited resources, the recommendations consider cost-effectiveness and the possible therapies with easier and greater access. Each question had five to seven relevant answers including two nonanswers. The results were tabulated in real time. CONCLUSION The voting results and recommendations presented in this document can be used by physicians to support the screening, diagnosis, and staging of PCa in areas of limited resources. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data; however, as guidelines for screening, diagnosis, and staging of PCa in developing countries have not been developed, this document will serve as a point of reference when confronted with this disease.

PURPOSE A group of international urology and medical oncology experts developed and completed a survey on prostate cancer (PCa) in developing countries. The results are reviewed and summarized, and recommendations on consensus statements for very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk PCa focused on developing countries were developed. METHODS A panel of experts developed more than 300 survey questions of which 66 questions concern the principal areas of interest of this paper: very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in developing countries. A larger panel of 99 international multidisciplinary cancer experts voted on these questions to create the recommendations for treatment and follow-up for very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk PCa in areas of limited resources discussed in this manuscript. RESULTS The panel voted publicly but anonymously on the predefined questions. Each question was deemed consensus if 75% or more of the full panel had selected a particular answer. These answers are based on panelist opinion not a literature review or meta-analysis. For questions that refer to an area of limited resources, the recommendations consider cost-effectiveness and the possible therapies with easier and greater access. Each question had five to seven relevant answers including two nonanswers. The results were tabulated in real time. CONCLUSION The voting results and recommendations presented in this document can be used by physicians to support management for very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in areas of limited resources. Individual clinical decision making should be supported by available data; however, as guidelines for treatment for very low, low, and intermediate risk of PCa in developing countries have not been developed, this document will serve as a point of reference when confronted with this disease.

Objectives: To evaluate the differences of peri-operatory and oncological outcomes between Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy and Open Radical Cystectomy in our center. Materials and Methods: Overall, 50 patients were included in this non randomized match-pair analysis: 25 patients who had undergone Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy for invasive bladder cancer (Group-1) and 25 patients with similar characteristics who had undergone Open Radical Cystectomy (Group-2). The patients were operated from January 2005 to December 2012 in a single Institution. Results: Mean operative time for groups 1 and 2 were 350 and 280 minutes (p=0.03) respectively. Mean blood loss was 330 mL for group 1 and 580 mL for group 2 (p=0.04). Intraoperative transfusion rate was 0% and 36% for groups 1 and 2 respectively (p=0.005). Perioperative complication rate was similar between groups. Mean time to oral intake was 2 days for group 1 and 3 days for group 2 (p=0.08). Median hospital stay was 7 days for group 1 and 13 for group 2 (p=0.04). There were no differences in positive surgical margins and overall survival, between groups. Conclusions: In a reference center with pelvic laparoscopic expertise, Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy may be considered a safe procedure with similar complication rate of Open Radical Cystectomy. Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy is more time consuming, with reduced bleeding and transfusion rate. Hospital stay seems to be shorter. Oncologically no difference was observed in our mid-term follow-up.

Purpose of review Penile cancer is a devastating disease, usually diagnosed late, that requires wide excisions, which causes alterations in self-esteem and body image, affecting sexual and urinary functions, which compromise quality of life. Recently, an increasing interest in penile-sparing surgeries (PSSs) has emerged, aiming to spare patients from these complications. Recent findings Several options of PSS have been popularized for selected cases (Ta-1, Tis and some T2), such as wide local excision, circumcision, partial penectomy, total or partial glansectomies with or without glans-resurfacing procedures, as well as new glans reconstructions using spatulated urethral advances or free skin grafts. These options, in general, achieve good local control, with adequate functional results and satisfactory cosmetic appearance. The local recurrences, however, are slightly higher than amputations. Contemporary techniques such as laser or cryotherapy can be performed in selected cases. Summary PSS must be indicated only for superficial penile cancer cases, such as Tis and Ta-1, and for selected invasive lesions (small distal pT2 tumors). Candidates for PSS should be adherent to follow-up requirements, allowing early detection of local recurrences. Prompt and effective salvage procedures are mandatory in these situations.