| Literature DB >> 24053403 |
Paul K Hegarty1, Ian Eardley, Axel Heidenreich, W Scott McDougal, Suks Minhas, Philippe E Spiess, Nick Watkin, Simon Horenblas.
Abstract
To compare the oncological safety of treating patients with penile cancer with conservative techniques developed to preserve function, cosmesis and psychological well-being with more radical ablative strategies. We conducted an extensive review of the literature of penile-preserving and ablative techniques and report on the oncological as well as functional outcomes. There were no randomised studies comparing penile-preserving and ablative techniques. Most studies consisted of retrospective cohorts. The quality of evidence was level 3 at best. Cancer-specific survival is similar in penile-preserving and ablative approaches for low-stage disease. Penile preservation is better for functional and cosmetic outcomes and should be offered as a primary treatment method in men with low-stage penile cancer.Entities:
Keywords: organ preservation; penile cancer; review; surgery; treatment
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24053403 DOI: 10.1111/bju.12338
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BJU Int ISSN: 1464-4096 Impact factor: 5.588