Search

Objective: To present the long‐term adjuvant radiotherapy outcomes of patients with pN3 squamous cell carcinoma of the penis (SCCp) treated at two UK centres. Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective audit of all pN3 SCCp patients, deemed suitable for adjuvant therapy by a specialist multidisciplinary team at St George's and Leeds Hospitals, who received adjuvant radiotherapy. Primary outcomes were recurrence‐free survival (RFS), cancer‐specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were time to adjuvant treatment, frequency of in‐field recurrence, site and side of recurrence, and dose and schedule of radiotherapy. Results: A total of 146 patients were included: 121 completed radiotherapy, 4 did not complete radiotherapy and 21 did not start it. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 59 (54–70)years. The 5‐year RFS was 51%, CSS was 51% and OS was 44%. Adjuvant radiotherapy was started at a median (IQR) of 75 (48–106) days. A dose of 45 Gy in 20 fractions was most commonly used. Of the 125 patients who started adjuvant treatment, 55 relapsed. Of these relapses, 30 occurred in an inguinal or pelvic nodal station and 26 of the 30 were in a radiation field. Relapses in 18 of the 55 cases were in visceral sites only and seven were in both nodal (non‐irradiated sites) and visceral sites. Doses of <50 Gy were used more commonly before 2013 and higher doses (>50 Gy) were more commonly used after 2013. Conclusions: Application of a standard radiotherapy protocol within a centralized supra‐network setting has achieved survival outcomes that would appear better than those previously documented for either radiotherapy or chemotherapy in a cohort with solely pN3 disease. The addition of adjuvant chemotherapy may improve these outcomes further. These data suggest that adjuvant radiotherapy has a role to play in the management of men with pN3 SCCp. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bulbar urethral stricture is a common cause for urinary symptoms in men and its two main treatment options both have drawbacks with little evidence on their relative cost-effectiveness. Current guidelines on the management of recurrent bulbar urethral stricture have been predominantly based on expert opinion and panel consensus.Objective: To assess the relative cost-effectiveness of open urethroplasty and endoscopic urethrotomy as treatment for recurrent urethral stricture in men.Methods: Set in the UK National Health Service with recruitment from 38 hospital sites, a randomised controlled trial of open urethroplasty and endoscopic urethrotomy with 6-monthly follow-up over 24 months was conducted. Two hundred and twenty-two men requiring operative treatment for recurrence of bulbar urethral stricture and having had at least one previous intervention for stricture were recruited. Effectiveness was measured by quality- adjusted life years (QALYs) derived from EQ-5D 5L. Cost-effectiveness was measured by the incremental cost per QALY gained over 24 months using a within trial analysis and a Markov model with a 10-year time horizon.Results: In the within trial, urethroplasty cost on average more than urethrotomy (cost difference: £2148 [95% CI 689, 3606]) and resulted in a similar number of QALYs on average (QALY difference: - 0.01 [95% CI - 0.17, 0.14)] over 24 months. The Markov model produced similar results. Sensitivity analyses using multiple imputation, suggested that the results were robust, despite observed missing data.Conclusions: Based on current practice and evidence, urethrotomy is a cost-effective treatment compared with urethroplasty.Keypoints: Urethrotomy and urethroplasty both led to symptom improvement for men with bulbar urethral stricture-a common cause for urinary symptoms in men; Urethroplasty appeared unlikely to offer good value for money compared to urethrotomy based on current evidence.Trial Registration: ISRCTN: 98009168 (date: 29 November 2012) and it is also in the UK NIHR Portfolio (reference 13507). Trial protocol: The latest version (1.8) of the full protocol is available at: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hta/105723/ #/ and a published version is also available: Stephenson R, Carnell S, Johnson N, Brown R, Wilkinson J, Mundy A, et al. Open urethroplasty versus endoscopic urethrotomy-clarifying the management of men with recurrent urethral stricture (the OPEN trial): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2015;16:600. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-1120-4. Trial main clinical results publication: Goulao B, Carnell S, Shen J, MacLennan G, Norrie J, Cook J, et al. Surgical Treatment for Recurrent Bulbar Urethral Stricture: A Randomised Open-label Superiority Trial of Open Urethroplasty Versus Endoscopic Urethrotomy (the OPEN Trial), European Urology, Volume 78, Issue 4, 2020, Pages 572-580. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Urethral stricture is a common cause of difficulty passing urine in men with prevalence of 0.5 %; about 62,000 men in the UK. The stricture is usually sited in the bulbar part of the urethra causing symptoms such as reduced urine flow. Initial treatment is typically by endoscopic urethrotomy but recurrence occurs in about 60% of men within 2 years. The best treatment for men with recurrent bulbar stricture is uncertain. Repeat endoscopic urethrotomy opens the narrowing but it usually scars up again within 2 years requiring repeated procedures. The alternative of open urethroplasty involves surgically reconstructing the urethra, which may need an oral mucosal graft. It is a specialist procedure with a longer recovery period but may give lower risk of recurrence. In the absence of firm evidence as to which is best, individual men have to trade off the invasiveness and possible benefit of each option. Their preference will be influenced by individual social circumstances, availability of local expertise and clinician guidance. The open urethroplasty versus endoscopic urethrotomy (OPEN) trial aims to better guide the choice of treatment for men with recurrent urethral strictures by comparing benefit over 2 years in terms of symptom control and need for further treatment.Methods/design: OPEN is a pragmatic, UK multicentre, randomised trial. Men with recurrent bulbar urethral strictures (at least one previous treatment) will be randomised to undergo endoscopic urethrotomy or open urethroplasty. Participants will be followed for 24 months after randomisation, measuring symptoms, flow rate, the need for re-intervention, health-related quality of life, and costs. The primary clinical outcome is the difference in symptom control over 24 months measured by the area under the curve (AUC) of a validated score. The trial has been powered at 90% with a type I error rate of 5% to detect a 0.1 difference in AUC measured on a 0-1 scale. The analysis will be based on all participants as randomised (intention-to-treat). The primary economic outcome is the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year. A qualitative study will assess willingness to be randomised and hence ability to recruit to the trial.Discussion: The OPEN Trial seeks to clarify relative benefit of the current options for surgical treatment of recurrent bulbar urethral stricture which differ in their invasiveness and resources required. Our feasibility study identified that participation would be limited by patient preference and differing recruitment styles of general and specialist urologists. We formulated and implemented effective strategies to address these issues in particular by inviting participation as close as possible to diagnosis. In addition re-calculation of sample size as recruitment progressed allowed more efficient design given the limited target population and funding constraints. Recruitment is now to target.Trial Registration: ISRCTN98009168 Date of registration: 29 November 2012. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents occupational and travel advice for people with kidney stones in Great Britain. Healthcare professionals are often called upon to judge whether someone with a known calculus is fit to go back to work or to travel. The Civil Aviation Authority in the country is the only civilian body that had formalized guidelines for the management of urinary stone disease. Urinary stone disease is a condition that might have a major impact on staff performing their duties at work.

Looks into the development of regional networks to provide evidence-based penile cancer treatments within the framework of structured multidisciplinary teams in Great Britain. Identification of the current treatment spectrum for a primary penile-carcinoma; Management of regional lymph nodes; Re-evaluation of sentinel lymph-node mapping in the clinically node-negative patient.

Abstract: Background: Studies of interventions for urethral stricture have inferred patient benefit from clinician-driven outcomes or questionnaires lacking scientifically robust evidence of their measurement properties for men with this disease. Objective: To evaluate urethral reconstruction from the patients’ perspective using a validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). Design, setting, and participants: Forty-six men with anterior urethral stricture at four UK urology centres completed the PROM before (baseline) and 2 yr after urethroplasty. Intervention: A psychometrically robust PROM for men with urethral stricture disease. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), health status, and treatment satisfaction were measured, and paired t and Wilcoxon matched-pairs tests were used for comparative analysis. Results and limitations: Thirty-eight men underwent urethroplasty for bulbar stricture and eight for penile stricture. The median (range) follow-up was 25 (20–30) mo. Total LUTS scores (0 = least symptomatic, 24 = most symptomatic) improved from a median of 12 at baseline to 4 at 2 yr (mean [95% confidence interval (CI)] of differences 6.6 [4.2–9.1], p < 0.0001). A total of 33 men (72%) felt their urinary symptoms interfered less with their overall quality of life, 8 (17%) reported no change, and 5 (11%) were worse 2 yr after urethroplasty. Overall, 40 men (87%) remained “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with the outcome of their operation. Health status visual analogue scale scores (100 = best imaginable health, 0 = worst) 2 yr after urethroplasty improved from a mean of 69 at baseline to 79 (mean [95% CI] of differences 10 [2–18], p = 0.018). Health state index scores (1 = full health, 0 = dead) improved from 0.79 at baseline to 0.89 at 2 yr (mean [95% CI] of differences 0.10 [0.02–0.18), p = 0.012]). Conclusions: This is the first study to prospectively evaluate urethral reconstruction using a validated PROM. Men reported continued relief from symptoms with related improvements in overall health status 2 yr after urethroplasty. These data can be used as a provisional reference point against which urethral surgeons can benchmark their performance. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Men who suffer recurrence of bulbar urethral stricture have to decide between endoscopic urethrotomy and open urethroplasty to manage their urinary symptoms. Evidence of relative clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness is lacking., Objectives: To assess benefit, harms and cost-effectiveness of open urethroplasty compared with endoscopic urethrotomy as treatment for recurrent urethral stricture in men., Design: Parallel-group, open-label, patient-randomised trial of allocated intervention with 6-monthly follow-ups over 24 months. Target sample size was 210 participants providing outcome data. Participants, clinicians and local research staff could not be blinded to allocation. Central trial staff were blinded when needed., Setting: UK NHS with recruitment from 38 hospital sites., Participants: A total of 222 men requiring operative treatment for recurrence of bulbar urethral stricture who had received at least one previous intervention for stricture., Interventions: A centralised randomisation system using random blocks allocated participants 1 : 1 to open urethroplasty (experimental group) or endoscopic urethrotomy (control group)., Main Outcome Measures: The primary clinical outcome was control of urinary symptoms. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained over 24 months. The main secondary outcome was the need for reintervention for stricture recurrence., Results: The mean difference in the area under the curve of repeated measurement of voiding symptoms scored from 0 (no symptoms) to 24 (severe symptoms) between the two groups was -0.36 [95% confidence interval (CI) -1.78 to 1.02; p  = 0.6]. Mean voiding symptom scores improved between baseline and 24 months after randomisation from 13.4 [standard deviation (SD) 4.5] to 6 (SD 5.5) for urethroplasty group and from 13.2 (SD 4.7) to 6.4 (SD 5.3) for urethrotomy. Reintervention was less frequent and occurred earlier in the urethroplasty group (hazard ratio 0.52, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.89; p  = 0.02). There were two postoperative complications requiring reinterventions in the group that received urethroplasty and five, including one death from pulmonary embolism, in the group that received urethrotomy. Over 24 months, urethroplasty cost on average more than urethrotomy (cost difference £2148, 95% CI £689 to £3606) and resulted in a similar number of QALYs (QALY difference -0.01, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.14). Therefore, based on current evidence, urethrotomy is considered to be cost-effective., Limitations: We were able to include only 69 (63%) of the 109 men allocated to urethroplasty and 90 (80%) of the 113 men allocated to urethrotomy in the primary complete-case intention-to-treat analysis., Conclusions: The similar magnitude of symptom improvement seen for the two procedures over 24 months of follow-up shows that both provide effective symptom control. The lower likelihood of further intervention favours urethroplasty, but this had a higher cost over the 24 months of follow-up and was unlikely to be considered cost-effective., Future Work: Formulate methods to incorporate short-term disutility data into cost-effectiveness analysis. Survey pathways of care for men with urethral stricture, including the use of enhanced recovery after urethroplasty. Establish a pragmatic follow-up schedule to allow national audit of outcomes following urethral surgery with linkage to NHS Hospital Episode Statistics., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN98009168., Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment ; Vol. 24, No. 61. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.