<b>Morbidity following Groin Dissection for Penile Carcinoma</b>

Ramamurthi, Ravi

doi:10.1111/j.1464-410x.1993.tb16304.x

Cited by 131 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…16,18,20,22,[26][27][28] Two studies used water displacement methods exclusively for limb volume assessment, defining lymphedema thresholds of 6.5% and 10%, 29,30 and another 4 studies used both circumference and water displacement. 23,[31][32][33] More subjective assessments of lymphedema included the Common Toxicity Criteria and the Late Effects Normal Tissues Scales, 34,35 but the majority used ad hoc clinical grading to define lymphedema such as skin-pinch tests or scales defined by the treating physician.…”

Section: Methods Of Lymphedema Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lymphedema beyond breast cancer

Cormier

Askew

Mungovan

et al. 2010

Cancer

398

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Secondary lymphedema is a debilitating, chronic, progressive condition that commonly occurs after the treatment of breast cancer. The purpose of the current study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the oncology-related literature excluding breast cancer to derive estimates of lymphedema incidence and to identify potential risk factors among various malignancies. METHODS: The authors systematically reviewed 3 major medical indices (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library databases, and Scopus) to identify studies that included a prospective assessment of lymphedema after cancer treatment. Studies were categorized according to malignancy, and data included treatment, complications, lymphedema measurement criteria, lymphedema incidence, and followup interval. A quality assessment of individual studies was performed using established criteria for systematic reviews. Bayesian meta-analytic techniques were applied to derive summary estimates when sufficient data were available. RESULTS: A total of 47 studies (7779 cancer survivors) met inclusion criteria: melanoma (n ¼ 15), gynecologic malignancies (n ¼ 22), genitourinary cancers (n ¼ 8), head/neck cancers (n ¼ 1), and sarcomas (n ¼ 1). The overall incidence of lymphedema was 15.5% and varied by malignancy (P < .001): melanoma, 16% (upper extremity, 5%; lower extremity, 28%); gynecologic, 20%; genitourinary, 10%; head/neck, 4%; and sarcoma, 30%. Increased lymphedema risk was also noted for patients undergoing pelvic dissections (22%) and radiation therapy (31%). Objective measurement methods and longer follow-up were both associated with increased lymphedema incidence. CONCLUSIONS: Lymphedema is a common condition affecting cancer survivors with various malignancies. The incidence of lymphedema is related to the type and extent of treatment, anatomic location, heterogeneity of assessment methods, and length of follow-up. Cancer 2010;116:5138-49.

show abstract

Section: Methods Of Lymphedema Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lymphedema beyond breast cancer

Cormier

Askew

Mungovan

et al. 2010

Cancer

398

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hence, the occurrence of nodal disease in their late stages becomes much more common. Again, the peak at which the recurrence of malignancy occurs is around the one year mark which clearly indicates that follow up till the first year has to be intensified in our patients [12].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Study on Incidence, Types and Treatment Options of Carcinoma Penis

Shanmugam¹,

Manoharan²

2016

SJAMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carcinoma penis is a common malignancy. Accounting for upto 10% of all cancers in uncircumcised male population in Asian countries. Carcinoma penis is almost unheard of races like the jews, who practice neonatal Circumcision. A very low incidence occurs in Muslims who undergo circumcision at around school going age. Squamous cell carcinoma accounts for at least 90% of all penile malignancies. 5% is constituted by adeno carcinoma Rest 5% by melanoma, Basal cell carcinoma & Sarcoma. It usually presents in sixth decade of life. It could be prevented or diagnosed early in most cases. The aim of the Study is to analyze the incidence, types, presenting symptoms and treatment of carcinoma penis. During 2009 and 2010 for a period of two years, 33 cases were admitted for treatment of carcinoma all the 33 cases were studied in detail with detailed clinical examination and special investigations like skin tests, serology, culture and special stains were done only wherever required. Histopathological examination of the primary lesion was done. The maximum incidence age group is found to e 41 -50 years. About 21 cases reported as a papillary variety and the rest 12 cases reported as a flat variety which means 64% of cases reported as a papillary one and the rest 16% as flat one. Patients of the 58% patients with flat variety had regional lymph node metastasis whereas 68% out of the papillary pattern had regional lymph node metastasis. The bulk of patients in this study presented primarily for a growth in penis in 85% of cases. The treatment for the primary cancer, depending on the extent of lesion in the penis, one of the following three surgeries was done. Partial amputation was done in 11 patients and total amputation with perinea urethrostomy with emasculation in 12 cases and without emasculation inurethrostomy with emasculation in 12 cases. Age incidence of Carcinoma penis is high in fifth decade. The commonest site of distribution in carcinoma penis is Glans. Ulcer proliferative lesion was the commonest presentation in carcinoma penis. The majority of cases were of squamous cell carcinoma. The prognosis depends upon the stage and nodal status at presentation. Partial Amputation was done for stage I; Total Amputation for stage II; surgery alone or surgery and radiotherapy for stage III. Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy in combination with surgery or alone for stage IV disease.

show abstract

“…It is a challenge to treat this disease because it presents with a wide range of clinical stages ranging from primary without inguinal adenopathy to synchronous or metachronous, unilateral/ bilateral adenopathy in such patients. At that place, must be balance in caring for these patients then that they are not over treated (prophylactic inguinal block dissection in negative groin nodes) or under treated (wait and watch policy in palpable, but false negative FNAC or loss of follow up) both of which contribute to substantial morbidity and mortality [13].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%