1
|
Gül M, Luca B, Dimitropoulos K, Capogrosso P, Milenkovic U, Cocci A, Veeratterapillay R, Hatzichristodoulou G, Modgil V, Russo GI, Tharakan T, Kalkanli A, Omar MI, Bettocchi C, Carvalho J, Corona G, Jones TH, Kadioglu A, Martinez-Salamanca JI, Serefoglu EC, Verze P, Minhas S, Salonia A. What is the effectiveness of surgical and non-surgical therapies in the treatment of ischemic priapism in patients with sickle cell disease? A systematic review by the EAU Sexual and Reproductive Health Guidelines Panel. Int J Impot Res 2024; 36:20-35. [PMID: 35941221 DOI: 10.1038/s41443-022-00590-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2022] [Revised: 06/08/2022] [Accepted: 06/09/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
Sickle cell disease (SCD) is an inherited hemoglobin disorder characterized by the occlusion of small blood vessels by sickle-shaped red blood cells. SCD is associated with a number of complications, including ischemic priapism. While SCD accounts for at least one-third of all priapism cases, no definitive treatment strategy has been established to specifically treat patients with SC priapism. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy and safety of contemporary treatment modalities for acute and stuttering ischemic priapism associated with SCD. The primary outcome measures were defined as resolution of acute priapism (detumescence) and complete response of stuttering priapism, while the primary harm outcome was as sexual dysfunction. The protocol for the review has been registered (PROSPERO Nr: CRD42020182001), and a systematic search of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane controlled trials databases was performed. Three trials with 41 observational studies met the criteria for inclusion in this review. None of the trials assessed detumescence, as a primary outcome. All of the trials reported a complete response of stuttering priapism; however, the certainty of the evidence was low. It is clear that assessing the effectiveness of specific interventions for priapism in SCD, well-designed, adequately-powered, multicenter trials are strongly required.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Gül
- Department of Urology, Selcuk University School of Medicine, Urology, Konya, Turkey
| | - B Luca
- Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, Milan, Italy
| | | | - P Capogrosso
- ASST-Sette Laghi, Circolo & Fondazione Macchi Hospital, University of Insurbria, Varese, Italy
| | - U Milenkovic
- University of Leuven, Laboratory for Experimental Urology, Leuven, Belgium
| | - A Cocci
- Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Urology, Florence, Italy
| | - R Veeratterapillay
- Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Urology, Newcastle, UK
| | - G Hatzichristodoulou
- Julius-Maximilians-University of Würzburg, Urology and Pediatric Urology, Würzburg, Germany
| | - V Modgil
- Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Andrology Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - G I Russo
- Vittorio Emanuele II, University of Catania, Urology, Catania, Italy
| | - T Tharakan
- Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, Urology, London, UK
| | - A Kalkanli
- Taksim Education and Research Hospital, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - M I Omar
- University of Aberdeen, Academic Urology Unit, Aberdeen, UK
| | - C Bettocchi
- University of Foggia, Department of Urology, Foggia, Italy
| | - J Carvalho
- Lusófona University of Humanities and Technologies, School of Psychology and Life Sciences, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - G Corona
- Azienda Usl Bologna Maggiore-Bellaria Hospital, Endocrinology Unit, Bologna, Italy
| | - T H Jones
- University of Sheffield Medical School, Oncology and Metabolism, Sheffield, UK
| | - A Kadioglu
- Istanbul University, Urology, Istanbul, Turkey
| | | | | | - P Verze
- University of Naples Federico II, Urology, Naples, Italy
| | - S Minhas
- Imperial Healthcare NHS Trust, Charing Cross Hospital, Urology, London, UK
| | - A Salonia
- URI-Urological Research Institute, Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, Milan, Italy.
- University Vita-salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Milenkovic U, Cocci A, Veeratterapillay R, Dimitropoulos K, Boeri L, Capogrosso P, Cilesiz NC, Gul M, Hatzichristodoulou G, Modgil V, Russo GI, Tharakan T, Omar MI, Bettocchi C, Carvalho J, Yuhong Y, Corona G, Jones H, Kadioglu A, Martinez-Salamanca JI, Verze P, Serefoglu EC, Minhas S, Salonia A. Surgical and minimally invasive treatment of ischaemic and non-ischaemic priapism: a systematic review by the EAU Sexual and Reproductive Health Guidelines panel. Int J Impot Res 2024; 36:36-49. [PMID: 36151318 DOI: 10.1038/s41443-022-00604-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2022] [Revised: 06/13/2022] [Accepted: 07/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
Surgical treatments for ischemic priapism (IP) include shunts or penile implants. Non-ischemic priapism (NIP) is usually the result of penile/perineal trauma causing an arterial fistula and embolisation may be required. We conducted a systematic review on behalf of the EAU Sexual and Reproductive health Guidelines panel to analyse the available evidence on efficacy and safety of surgical modalities for IP and NIP. Outcomes were priapism resolution, sexual function and adverse events following surgery. Overall, 63 studies (n = 923) met inclusion criteria up to September 2021. For IP (n = 702), surgery comprised distal (n = 274), proximal shunts (n = 209) and penile prostheses (n = 194). Resolution occurred in 18.7-100% for distal, 5.7-100% for proximal shunts and 100% for penile prostheses. Potency rate was 20-100% for distal, 11.1-77.2% for proximal shunts, and 26.3-100% for penile prostheses, respectively. Patient satisfaction was 60-100% following penile prostheses implantation. Complications were 0-42.5% for shunts and 0-13.6% for IPP. For NIP (n = 221), embolisation success was 85.7-100% and potency 80-100%. The majority of studies were retrospective cohort studies. Risk of bias was high. Overall, surgical shunts have acceptable success rates in IP. Proximal/venous shunts should be abandoned due to morbidity/ED rates. In IP > 48 h, best outcomes are seen with penile prostheses implantation. Embolisation is the mainstay technique for NIP with high resolution rates and adequate erectile function.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- U Milenkovic
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - A Cocci
- Department of Urology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | | | - K Dimitropoulos
- Department of Urology, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK
| | - L Boeri
- Department of Urology, IRCCCS Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy
| | - P Capogrosso
- ASST-Sette Laghi, Circolo & Fondazione Macchi Hospital, University of Insurbria, Varese, Italy
| | - N C Cilesiz
- Department. of Urology, Istanbul Taksim GOP Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - M Gul
- Department of Reproductive Biology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | | | - V Modgil
- Department of Urology, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK
| | - G I Russo
- Department of Urology, University of Catania, Catania, Italy
| | - T Tharakan
- Department of Urology, Charing Cross Hospital, London, UK
| | - M I Omar
- Department of Urology, University of Aberdeen, Abderdeen, UK
| | - C Bettocchi
- Department of Urology, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
| | - J Carvalho
- Department of Psychology and Health Sciences, Universidade Lusofona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Y Yuhong
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| | - G Corona
- Department of Endocrinology, Maggiore-Bellaria Hospital, Bologna, Italy
| | - H Jones
- Department of Endocrinology, Barnsley Hospital, Barnsley, UK
| | - A Kadioglu
- Department of Radiology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - J I Martinez-Salamanca
- Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda, Madrid, Spain
| | - P Verze
- Department of Urology, University Federico II of Naples, Naples, Italy
| | - E C Serefoglu
- Department of Urology, Bahceci Health Group, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - S Minhas
- Department of Urology, Imperial College, London, UK
| | - A Salonia
- Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI; IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
- University Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Rieken M, Xylinas E, Kluth L, Trinh QD, Lee RK, Fajkovic H, Novara G, Margulis V, Lotan Y, Martinez-Salamanca JI, Matsumoto K, Seitz C, Remzi M, Karakiewicz PI, Scherr DS, Briganti A, Kautzky-Willer A, Bachmann A, Shariat SF. Diabetes mellitus without metformin intake is associated with worse oncologic outcomes after radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 2013; 40:113-20. [PMID: 24113620 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.09.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/03/2013] [Revised: 09/04/2013] [Accepted: 09/10/2013] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
AIMS Evidence suggests a detrimental effect of diabetes mellitus (DM) on cancer incidence and outcomes. To date, the effect of DM and its treatment on prognosis in upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) remains uninvestigated. We tested the hypothesis that DM and metformin use impact oncologic outcomes of patients treated with radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) for UTUC. METHODS Retrospective analysis of 2492 patients with UTUC treated at 23 institutions with RNU without neoadjuvant therapy. Cox regression models addressed the association of DM and metformin use with disease recurrence, cancer-specific mortality and any-cause mortality. RESULTS A total of 365 (14.3%) patients had DM and 194 (7.8%) patients used metformin. Within a median follow-up of 36 months, 663 (26.6%) patients experienced disease recurrence, 545 patients (21.9%) died of UTUC and 884 (35.5%) patients died from any cause. Diabetic patients who did not use metformin were at significantly higher risk of disease recurrence and cancer-specific death compared to non-diabetic patients and diabetic patients who used metformin. In multivariable Cox regression analyses, DM treated without metformin was associated with worse recurrence-free survival (HR: 1.44, 95% CI 1.10-1.90, p = 0.009) and cancer-specific mortality (HR: 1.49, 95% CI 1.11-2.00, p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS Diabetic UTUC patients without metformin use have significantly worse oncologic outcomes than diabetics who used metformin and non-diabetics. The possible mechanism behind the impact of DM on UTUC biology and the potentially protective effect of metformin need further elucidation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Rieken
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - E Xylinas
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Cochin Hospital, APHP, Paris Descartes University, Paris, France
| | - L Kluth
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Q-D Trinh
- Division of Urologic Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - R K Lee
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - H Fajkovic
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - G Novara
- Department of Surgical, Oncological and Gastroenterologic Sciences, Urology Clinic, University of Padua, Italy
| | - V Margulis
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - Y Lotan
- Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
| | - J I Martinez-Salamanca
- Department of Urology, Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - K Matsumoto
- Department of Urology, Kitasato University School of Medicine, Sagamihara, Kanagawa, Japan
| | - C Seitz
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - M Remzi
- Department of Urology, Landesklinikum Korneuburg, Korneuburg, Austria
| | - P I Karakiewicz
- Department of Urology, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - D S Scherr
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
| | - A Briganti
- Department of Urology, Vita-Salute University, Milan, Italy
| | - A Kautzky-Willer
- Unit of Gender Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - A Bachmann
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - S F Shariat
- Department of Urology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
| | | |
Collapse
|