Objective:Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy(RAPN)has become widely used for treatment of renal cell carcinoma and it is expanding in the field of complex renal masses.The aim of this systematic review was to analyze ...
详细信息
Objective:Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy(RAPN)has become widely used for treatment of renal cell carcinoma and it is expanding in the field of complex renal masses.The aim of this systematic review was to analyze outcomes of RAPN for completely endophytic renal masses,large tumors(cT2-T3),renal cell carcinoma in solitary kidney,recurrent tumors,completely endophytic and hilar masses,and simultaneous and multiple tumors.Methods:A comprehensive search in the PubMed,Scopus,Web of Science,and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was performed in December 2022 for English language papers.The primary endpoint was to evaluate the role of RAPN in the setting of each category of complex renal masses considered.The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the surgical and functional outcomes.Results:After screening 1250 records,43 full-text manuscripts were selected,comprising over 8500 patients.Twelve and thirteen studies reported data for endophytic and hilar renal masses,respectively.Five and three studies reported outcomes for cT2-T3 and solitary kidney patients,respectively.Four studies focused on redo-RAPN for recurrent tumors.Two studies investigated simultaneous bilateral renal masses and five reports focused on multiple tumor excision in ipsilateral kidney.Conclusion:Over the past decade,evidence supporting the use of RAPN for the most challenging nephron-sparing surgery indications has continuously grown.Although limitations remain including study design and lack of detailed long-term functional and oncological outcomes,the adoption of RAPN for the included advanced indications is associated with favorable surgical outcomes with good preservation of renal function without compromising the oncological result.Certainly,a higher likelihood of complication might be expected when facing extremely challenging cases.However,none of these indications should be considered per se an exclusion criterion for performing RAPN.Ultimately,a risk-adapted approach should be employed.
Aim: To examine the preference for two dosing regimens of 20 mg of tadalafil, on demand or three times per week, in men affected with erectile dysfunction (ED) in Italy. Methods: Scheduled Use versus on demand Reg...
详细信息
Aim: To examine the preference for two dosing regimens of 20 mg of tadalafil, on demand or three times per week, in men affected with erectile dysfunction (ED) in Italy. Methods: Scheduled Use versus on demand Regimen Evaluation (SURE) is a multicenter, crossover and open-label study, involving 94 urology centers in Italy. Patients aged 18 years or older affected with ED for at least 3 months were enrolled and randomized to 20 mg of tadalafil treatment on demand or three times per week for 5-6 weeks. After a 1-week washout, patients were crossed over to the alternate regimen for 5-6 weeks. A treatment preference question was used to determine the preferred treatment regimen. International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and Sexual Encounter Profile (SEP) questionnaire were used as efficacy measures. Results: A total of 1 058 men (mean age 54.8 years), were randomized to treatment. Overall, 59.1% of patients preferred the on-demand regimen and 41.9% preferred the three times per week dosing. Both regimens were efficacious and well tolerated. Although a statistically higher improvement of the IIEF erectile function (IIEF-EF) domain score and the SEP questionnaire was reported for the three times per week compared to the ondemand treatment regimen, this difference was numerically minimal and lacking in clinical significance. Conclusion: Tadalafil is effective and well tolerated whether used on demand or three times per week. Patients should be given the option to choose the best treatment regimen according to personal needs and preferences.
“勃起功能障碍观测研究”(Erectile Dysfunction Observational Study,EDOS)是一项为期6个月的多中心前瞻性研究,研究对象包括被要求开始接受治疗或改变治疗方式的ED病人。本研究旨在分析ED的治疗模式,并比较不同治疗模式的疗效。研究对象为到医院看病并诊断需要进行ED治疗的患者。他们接受ED治疗,并在治疗开始时、治疗3个月、6个月时回答来自IIEF(International Index of Erectile Function),EDITS(Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction),SF-PAIRS(Short Form of the Psychological and Interpersonal Relationship Scale)/nq卷的问题。医生可以给病人开出市场上现有的任何疗法,并可以在治疗过程中任何时间改变疗法。在完成为期6个月的分析的1338名病人中,有624人(47%)改变了疗法,714人(53%)一直接受最初诊断的疗法,其中接受治疗的病人持续接受一种疗法的比率显著高于接受西地那非或伐地那非治疗的病人。其它影响这一比率的变量包括性欲低下和ED。各种PDE-5抑制剂在效力、病人满意度、自信心、自发性等方面无显著差异。接受他达拉非治疗的病人的SF—PAIRS“时间相关”项的分数显著优于接受其它治疗的病人。结果显示现有的三种PDE-5抑制剂的临床实践和临床实验结果相似,但病人如果要终止或改变用药,他达拉非的风险较低。
暂无评论