No abstract

No abstract

. Surgical treatment of lymphedema of the penis and scrotum. Clinics. 2006;61(4):289-94. PURPOSE:Lymphedema of the penis and scrotum, regardless of its etiology, is determined by reduced lymphatic flow with subsequent enlargement of the penis and scrotum. The clinical course of this condition is characterized by extreme discomfort for patients, with limitation of local hygiene, ambulation, sexual intercourse, and voiding in the standing position. The purpose of the present study is to present the experience and results of the treatment of lymphedema of the penis and scrotum by removing affected tissues and correcting the penoscrotal region. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Seventeen patients with lymphedema of the penis and scrotum were treated with a modified Charles procedure, which consists of the excision of the affected skin followed by scrotoplasty and midline suture simulating the scrotal raphe. The penis is covered with a split-thickness skin graft by means of a zigzag suture on its ventral surface. RESULTS: Regression of symptoms and improvement of previous clinical conditions were verified in the follow-up which ranged from 6 months to 6 years. One patient who had undergone lymphadenectomy with radiation therapy due to penile cancer had recurrent scrotum lymphedema. CONCLUSIONS: The modified Charles procedure for the treatment of penoscrotal lymphedema is easily reproducible and allows better local hygiene, easier ambulation, voiding in the standing position, resuming sexual intercourse, and finally, better cosmetic results in the affected area with remarkable improvement in quality of life.

Animal bite is a rare but potentially severe cause of genital trauma and children are the most common victims. Morbidity is directly associated with the severity of the initial wound. Because patients tend to seek medical care promptly, infectious complications are unusual. Management involves irrigation, débridement, antibiotic prophylaxis, and tetanus and rabies immunization as appropriate as well as primary wound closure or surgical reconstruction. Good functional and cosmetic results are possible in the majority of cases.

Percutaneous nephrolithotripsy with the patient in a modified supine position is effective and safe. It may be considered for most patients requiring percutaneous nephrolithotripsy, especially if concomitant ureteroscopy is planned.

Pure laparoscopic nephrectomy was successful in 72% of patients with inflammatory kidneys. The laparoscopic dissection was useful even in those cases converted to open surgery. This is a high-risk procedure, however, and both surgeon and patient must be aware of that before the decision is made for this approach.

Introduction: This work evaluates the results of ureteroscopic treatment of impacted ureteral stones with a pneumatic lithotripter. Materials and Methods: From March 1997 to May 2002, 42 patients with impacted ureteral stones were treated by retrograde ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy. Twenty-eight patients were female and 14 were male. The stone size ranged from 5 to 20 mm. The ureteral sites of the stones were distal in 21, middle in 12 and proximal in 9.Results: Considering stones with distal location in the ureter, 1 patient had ureteral perforation and developed a stricture in the follow-up (4.7%). As for stones in the middle ureter, 2 perforations and 1 stricture were observed (8.3%) and regarding stones located in the proximal ureter, 5 perforations and 4 strictures occurred (44%). In the mid ureter, 1 ureteral avulsion was verified. In 34 patients without ureteral perforation, only 1 developed a stricture (2.9%). Of 8 patients who had perforation, 6 developed strictures. The overall incidence of stricture following treatment of impacted ureteral calculi was 14.2%. Conclusions: Ureteroscopy for impacted ureteral calculi is associated with a higher incidence of ureteral perforation and stricture. Ureteroscopy of proximal ureteral calculi is associated with a high risk of perforation, when compared to mid or distal ureteral calculi. Ureteral perforation at the site of the stone seems to be the primary risk factor for stricture formation in these cases.

No abstract