ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Growing interest surrounds the concept of en bloc transurethral resection of bladder tumors (ERBT). Theoretical advantages include improved adherence to oncological principles and potential yield of superior pathological specimens. Multiple ERBT methods exist. This review summarizes the current evidence regarding application of differing techniques and technologies to ERBT. METHODS: A systematic review of MEDLINE/EMBASE/Scopus databases was performed, using terms "en bloc," "ERBT," "bladder," and "urinary bladder neoplasm." Template-based data extraction included technique of ERBT, feasibility, tumor size, activation of obturator nerve reflex, operative complications, detrusor muscle sampling rate, and recurrence data. RESULTS: Multiple approaches to ERBT have evolved, using a variety of energy sources. The feasibility of electrocautery, laser, combined waterjet/electrocautery, and polypectomy snare techniques have been confirmed in achieving ERBT. ERBT appears safe, with a low complication rate. The use of laser energy sources reduces the risk of activating the obturator nerve reflex during lateral wall resections. Otherwise, no energy source is unequivocally superior in achieving ERBT. The rate of detrusor muscle sampling is high with use of ERBT and appears superior to that achieved with conventional TURBT (cTURBT) in multiple comparative studies. A limited number of largely non-randomized trials assess bladder tumor recurrence; current evidence suggests this is similar between ERBT and cTURBT groups. CONCLUSIONS: ERBT using a variety of technologies is feasible and safe, with a high detrusor muscle sampling rate. Further research is required to determine whether rates of residual disease or recurrence can be reduced with ERBT vs. cTURBT.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess patient-reported outcomes of oncoplastic penile reconstruction using standardized questionnaires. Whilst organ-preserving penile cancer surgery has evolved, aiming to preserve genital function, reduce psychological morbidity of radical penectomy, and maximise patient quality of life, few studies have evaluated patients' final perceptions. METHODS: Following ethical approval, patients post partial/radical glansectomy with reconstruction 2016-2019, under a single surgeon, were identified. Patients were posted a modified Index of Male Genital Image, the IIEF-5, a customised questionnaire exploring outcomes of urinary and sensory function and the EORTC QLQ-C30 to complete and return. Questionnaires were nonidentifiable, however study ID linked responses to the procedure performed. RESULTS: A total of 130 questionnaires were received from 35 patients post penile reconstruction, giving a response rate of 71.4% (35/49). Mean time from surgery was 22 months (4-51), and mean age 61 years (31-79). The majority (82.4%, n = 28) were satisfied or felt neutral about the appearance of their genitalia. High satisfaction with postprocedure urinary function was reported; 85.3% (29/34) could void from a standing position and 79.4% (27/34) reported little or no spraying of urine. Nineteen patients (55.89%) were sexually active, with mean IIEF-5 scores of 14.9 (5-25) (partial glansectomy) and 15.8 (5-25) (radical glansectomy). Mean QoL over past week on 7-point EORTC QLQ-C30 scale was 5.88 (3-7). CONCLUSION: We report good aesthetic and functional outcomes in a unique study exploring penile cancer surgery patient-reported outcome measures. These results strongly support phallus-preserving phallic-preserving strategies as the standard of care in eligible patients undergoing penile cancer surgery.
