Objectives: Currently no consensus exists about the role of the foreskin or the effect circumcision has on penile sensitivity and overall sexual satisfaction. Our study assesses the effect of circumcision on sexually active men and the relative impact this may have on informed consent prior to surgery. Materials and Methods: One hundred and fifty men between the ages of 18 and 60 years were identified as being circumcised for benign disease between 1999 and 2002. Patients with erectile dysfunction were excluded from the study. The data was assessed using the abridged, 5-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5). Questions were also asked about libido, penile sensitivity, premature ejaculation, pain during intercourse and appearance before and after circumcision. IIEF-5 data was analysed using two-tailed paired t test to compare pre-operative and post-operative score changes across the study group. For the rest of the questions, data was analysed using ‘Sign Test’, calculating two-sided p values and 95% confidence intervals. Results: Fifty-nine percent of patients (88/150) responded. The total mean IIEF-5 score was 22.41 ± 0.94 and 21.13 ± 3.17 before and after circumcision, respectively (p = 0.4). Seventy-four percent of patients had no change in their libido levels, 69% noticed less pain during intercourse (p < 0.05), and 44% of the patients (p = 0.04) and 38% of the partners (p = 0.02) thought the penis appearance improved after circumcision. Penile sensation improved after circumcision in 38% (p = 0.01) but got worse in 18%, with the remainder having no change. Overall satisfaction was 61%. Conclusions: Penile sensitivity had variable outcomes after circumcision. The poor outcome of circumcision considered by overall satisfaction rates suggests that when we circumcise men, these outcome data should be discussed during the informed consent process.
In a retrospective study of 185 patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the renal pelvis and ureter, of whom 127 were treated by total nephroureterectomy and 58 by conservative resection, the survival of those with superficial well differentiated tumours was greater than 90% in each group. When urothelium was left behind after conservative resection, there was a 22% rate of recurrence on the same side but this almost only occurred when the original tumour had been multifocal. Post-operative radiotherapy did not improve survival.
In patients with multiple T1G3 tumours with or without associated CIS, or in those with single T1G3 tumour with associated CIS the incidence of the disease being already muscle invasive at the time of clinical diagnosis is 55%. Early radical cystectomy should be advocated in this group. Conversely, for a single T1G3 tumour without associated CIS, conservative bladder preserving strategy with immuno-chemotherapy and close surveillance is justified.
Objectives: Bladder and prostate cancers occur with increasing prevalence in the ageing population. Our study aims to quantify the incidence of prostate cancer in patients undergoing cystoprostatectomy for bladder cancer and assess the impact of that incidental prostate cancer on oncological outcome. Methods and Materials: We retrospectively reviewed the pathology reports of 128 men who underwent cystoprostatectomy for bladder cancer. Results: Twenty-three men (18%) were found to have incidental prostate cancer. All incidental prostate cancers were organ confined and 91% were well or moderately differentiated. At a mean follow-up of 55 months the prostate cancer-free survival was 96%. Conclusion: The incidence of prostate cancer in cystoprostatectomy specimens is high. When the prostate is removed completely the presence of incidental prostate cancer does not influence the overall oncological outcome.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.