Update on penile sparing surgery for penile cancer

Anastasiadis, Eleni; Ayres, Benjamin; Watkin, N.

doi:10.1097/mou.0000000000000939

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As indicated by numerous studies, penile cancer treatment has a negative impact on the quality of life, worsens social interactions and negatively affects patients' sexual functioning, and thus their self-esteem. Due to the treatment and its consequences, some patients experience strong negative emotions (especially anxiety and sadness) and even exhibit symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder, or depression with suicidal thoughts [9][10][11][12][13]. In addition, the men surveyed claimed to have experienced physical and sexual changes as a result of surgical treatment, which affected their relationships, sex life and even sense of identity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acceptance of illness and satisfaction with the life of the patient after penectomy

Sraga,

Zmarlak,

Szajnowska

et al. 2023

Palliat Med Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Penile cancer is a rare malignant neoplasm, occurring mainly in men in their sixties and seventies. The consequences of treatment often include a severely disturbed perception of one's body image, lowered self-esteem and difficulties in daily functioning, which can result in reduced satisfaction with further life. This study aimed to assess the life satisfaction and level of acceptance of illness of a 42-year-old patient after penectomy in the course of cancer. The following tools were applied in the study: the authors' own questionnaire, the Acceptance of Illness Scale (AIS) and the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS). The patient surveyed scored 38 out of 40 on the AIS scale, indicating that he accepted his illness, while on the SWLS scale, he scored the maximum number of points indicating a high overall sense of satisfaction with life. The patient did not report any difficulties in terms of daily functioning resulting from the diagnosed disease and the treatment administered.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acceptance of illness and satisfaction with the life of the patient after penectomy

Sraga,

Zmarlak,

Szajnowska

et al. 2023

Palliat Med Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hence, radical surgical management options have traditionally been the cornerstone of treatment associated with very good long-term oncological outcomes. However, the amputating consequence of this radical surgery leads to serious physical, sexual and psychological morbidity [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New Perspectives in Penile Cancer Management: How to Retain Functional Outcomes

Martins

2023

MRAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Penile cancer is a rare malignancy and a debilitating condition in most industrialized nations that often requires aggressive surgical or multimodal treatment with significant anatomical, functional, and psychosocial impact on patients’ quality of life. Total or partial penile amputation has been considered the standard of treatment according to locoregional clinical staging and risk stratification. However, these surgical options are associated with significant negative functional and psychological outcomes in terms of body image, self-esteem, and manhood resulting in loss of sexual function and inability of upright voiding. Recently, a critical paradigm shift has taken place in the clinical management of penile malignancy, that is, the implementation of alternative, less-invasive surgical strategies to deal with the primary malignancy. These sparing approaches of penile anatomy aim to retain penile and urinary functions and overall quality of life and thus interfering as little as possible with functional anatomy. This paradigm shift has been made possible by advances in surgical and technological developments which have resulted in organ-preserving strategies with gratifying psychosocial and functional outcomes simultaneously without compromising final cancer control. This spectrum of novel surgical strategies includes local excision, glansectomy, and partial penectomy followed by surgical reconstructive procedures consisting of primary closure of the resulting defect, closure with skin flaps or split- thickness skin grafts, penile lengthening and/or enhancing procedures, neophalloplasty, and, more recently, penile transplantation fostered by limitations of conventional reconstruction. This review discusses the complexities of surgical reconstruction following penile cancer treatment including the burgeoning field of penile transplantation.

show abstract

“…PSS is associated with higher rates of local recurrence (10-55%), but similar overall survival, compared with partial or radical penectomy [2][3][4][5]. Several PSS procedures have been recently developed for penile cancer patients, varying from less invasive techniques, such as topical chemotherapy or laser ablation, to more aggressive treatments like glansectomy or partial penectomy [6]. However, despite the rates of local recurrence varying according to the PSS technique used [5,7], even with glansectomy approximately 4-12.8% of patients experience local recurrence during follow-up [8,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Penile-Sparing Surgery for Tumour Recurrence after Previous Glansectomy/Partial Penectomy: Treatment Feasibility and Oncological Outcomes

Musi,

Molinari,

Mistretta

et al. 2023

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We tested the feasibility and oncological outcomes after penile-sparing surgery (PSS) for local recurrent penile cancer after a previous glansectomy/partial penectomy. We retrospectively analysed 13 patients (1997–2022) with local recurrence of penile cancer after a previous glansectomy or partial penectomy. All patients underwent PSS: circumcision, excision, or laser ablation. First, technical feasibility, treatment setting, and complications (Clavien–Dindo) were recorded. Second, Kaplan–Meier plots depicted overall and local recurrences over time. Overall, 11 (84.5%) vs. 2 (15.5%) patients were previously treated with glansectomy vs. partial penectomy. The median (IQR) time to disease recurrence was 56 (13–88) months. Six (46%) vs. two (15.5%) vs. five (38.5%) patients were treated with, respectively, local excision vs. local excision + circumcision vs. laser ablation. All procedures, except one, were performed in an outpatient setting. Only one Clavien–Dindo 2 complication was recorded. The median follow-up time was 41 months. Overall, three (23%) vs. four (30.5%) patients experienced local vs. overall recurrence, respectively. All local recurrences were safely treated with salvage surgery. In conclusion, we reported the results of a preliminary analysis testing safety, feasibility, and early oncological outcomes of PSS procedures for patients with local recurrence after previous glansectomy or partial penectomy. Stronger oncological outcomes should be tested in other series to optimise patient selection.

show abstract

Update on penile sparing surgery for penile cancer

Cited by 7 publications

References 25 publications

Acceptance of illness and satisfaction with the life of the patient after penectomy

Acceptance of illness and satisfaction with the life of the patient after penectomy

New Perspectives in Penile Cancer Management: How to Retain Functional Outcomes

Penile-Sparing Surgery for Tumour Recurrence after Previous Glansectomy/Partial Penectomy: Treatment Feasibility and Oncological Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About