Bladder Cancer Survivors Who Do Not Smoke Have Better Longitudinal Health-Related Quality of Life Measures: An Assessment of the Comparative Effectiveness and Survivorship Health in Bladder Cancer (CEASE-BC) Study.

PURPOSE: Cigarette smoking is the most common risk factor for the development of bladder cancer (BC), yet there is a paucity of data characterizing the relationship between smoking status and longitudinal health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes in patients with BC. We examined the association between smoking status and HRQoL among patients with BC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were sourced from a prospective, longitudinal study open between 2014 and 2017, which examined HRQoL in patients aged ≥ 18 years old diagnosed with BC across North Carolina. The QLQ-C30 (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire core instrument) was administered at 3, 12, and 24 months after BC diagnosis. Our primary exposure of interest was current smoking status. Linear regression using generalized estimating equations was used to analyze the relationship between smoking status and various domains of the QLQ-C30. RESULTS: A total of 154 patients enrolled in the study. Eighteen percent were classified as smoking at 3 months from diagnosis, and packs per day ranged from < 0.5 to 2. When controlling for time from diagnosis, demographic covariates, cancer stage, and treatment type, mean differences for physical function (7.4), emotional function (5.6), and fatigue measures (-8.2) were significantly better for patients with BC who did not smoke. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with BC who do not smoke have significantly better HRQoL scores in the domains of physical function, emotional function, and fatigue. These results underscore the need to treat smoking as an essential component of BC care.

Urologists' Perceptions and Practices Related to Patient Smoking and Cessation: A National Assessment From the 2021 American Urological Association Census.

OBJECTIVE: To assess urologists' perceptions and practices related to smoking and smoking cessation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six survey questions were designed to assess beliefs, practices, and determinants related to tobacco use assessment and treatment (TUAT) in outpatient urology clinics. These questions were included in an annual census survey (2021) offered to all practicing urologists. Responses were weighted to represent the practicing US population of nonpediatric urologists (N = 12,852). The primary outcome was affirmative responses to the question, "Do you agree it is important for urologists to screen for and provide smoking cessation treatment to patients in the outpatient clinic?" Practice patterns, perceptions, and opinions of optimal care delivery were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 98% of urologists agreed (27%) or strongly agreed (71%) that cigarette smoking is a significant contributor to urologic disease. However, only 58% agreed that TUAT is important in urology clinics. Most urologists (61%) advise patients who smoke to quit but do not provide additional cessation counseling or medications or arrange follow-up. The most frequently identified barriers to TUAT were lack of time (70%), perceptions that patients are unwilling to quit (44%), and lack of comfort prescribing cessation medications (42%). Additionally, 72% of respondents stated that urologists should provide a recommendation to quit and refer patients for cessation support. CONCLUSION: TUAT does not routinely occur in an evidence-based fashion in outpatient urology clinics. Addressing established barriers and facilitating these practices with multilevel implementation strategies can promote tobacco treatment and improve outcomes for patients with urologic disease.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion in genitourinary clinical trials leading to FDA novel drug approval: An assessment of the FDA center for drug evaluation and research drug trials snapshot.

To determine the distribution of race and ethnicity among genitourinary oncology trial participants leading to FDA approval of novel molecular entities/biologics. Secondarily, we evaluated whether the proportion of Black participants in clinical trials increased over time. We quired the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Drug Trials Snapshot (DTS) between 2015 and 2020 for urologic oncology clinical trials leading to FDA approval of novel drugs. Enrollment data was stratified by race and ethnicity. Cochran-Armitage Trend tests were used to examine changes in Black patient participation over years. Nine clinical trials were identified that led to FDA approval of 5 novel molecular entities for prostate and 4 molecular entities for urothelial carcinoma treatment. Trials for prostate cancer included 5202 participants of which 69.8% were White, 4.0% Black, 11.0% Asian, 3.6% Hispanic, <1% American Indian/Alaska Native or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 3% other. Trials in urothelial carcinoma had 704 participants of which 75.1% were male, 80.8% White, 2.3% Black, 2.4% Hispanic, <1% American Indian/Alaska Native or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 5% other. Black participation rates over time did not change for urothelial (P = 0.59) or the combined cancer cohort (P = 0.29). Prostate cancer enrollment trends among Black participant declined over time (P = 0.03). Participants in genitourinary clinical trials leading to FDA approval of novel drugs are overwhelmingly white. Involving stakeholders who represent the needs and interests of underrepresented populations in the design and implementation of clinical trials of novel agents may be a strategy to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion among genitourinary clinical trials.

Non-oncology clinical trial engagement in a nationally representative sample: Identification of motivators and barriers.

BACKGROUND: Enrollment in non-oncology clinical trials is often challenging and social determinants that may serve as motivators or barriers to clinical trial enrollment are largely unexplored. We sought to assess engagement in non-oncology clinical trials with a focus on social determinants of health as barriers or motivators toward participation. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of non-cancer respondents was conducted using the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) administered in 2020. Our analytic cohort was comprised of respondents with no reported history of cancer. Our primary outcome of interest was trial engagement defined as receiving an invitation to participate in a clinical trial. Secondary outcomes included participation in a clinical trial and reported motivators and barriers to clinical trial participation. RESULTS: A total of 3113 respondents with no reported history of cancer were included. Overall, 8.1% of respondents reported being invited to participate in a clinical trial. Amongst those invited to participate, 47.7% reported participating in a clinical trial. Respondents reported that clinical trial participation was motivated "somewhat" or "a lot" by "wanting to get better" (80.5%), "helping other people" (61.4%), "physician encouragement" (60.6%), "getting a chance to try new care" (60.2%), "family friend encouragement" (54.2%), or "getting paid" (50.0%). Overall, 82.5% of all respondents "don't know anything" or have "a little knowledge" about clinical trials. Reported barriers to clinical trial participation including getting transportation, childcare or paid time off work (48.4%) and standard of care not covered by insurance (62.0%) influenced the decision to participate "somewhat" or "a lot." CONCLUSION: Amongst a nationally representative sample, non-oncology clinical trial invitation is low, but participation amongst those invited is nearly 50%. This highlights the need for clinician engagement in clinical trials. Identifying modifiable social determinants of non-oncologic clinical trial participation may help promote improved engagement.

National assessment of recommendations from healthcare providers for smoking cessation among adults with cancer.

Cancer survivors benefit from evidence-based smoking cessation treatment. A crucial first step in this process is a clinician recommending that the patient quit smoking. However, contemporary delivery of advice to quit among patients with cancer is not well known. In a cross-sectional analysis of all adult smokers included in a prospective population-representative study of US adults, we analyzed the frequency that patients reported receiving advice to quit smoking from a healthcare professional according to reported cancer history (no cancer, tobacco-related cancer, non-tobacco related cancer history). Among an estimated 28.3 million smokers, 9.3% reported a history of cancer, 48.8% of which were tobacco-related cancers. In general, advice to quit was reported by more (67.8%) cancer survivors than those adults without any cancer (56.0%). After adjustment for sociodemographic factors, smokers with a non tobacco-related cancer (0.51, 95% CI 0.32-0.83) and those without any cancer history (0.43, 95% CI 0.30-0.63) were both less likely to report being advised to quit smoking than patients with a tobacco-related cancer history.

A Population-Level Assessment of Smoking Cessation following a Diagnosis of Tobacco- or Nontobacco-Related Cancer among United States Adults.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking cessation after a cancer diagnosis can significantly improve treatment outcomes and reduce the risk of cancer recurrence and all-cause mortality. AIM: We sought to measure the association between cancer diagnosis and subsequent smoking cessation. METHODS: Data was sourced from the Population Assessment of Health and Tobacco (PATH) study, a representative population-based sample of United States adults. Our analytic sample included all adult smokers at Wave I, our baseline. The exposure of interest was either a tobacco-related cancer diagnosis, nontobacco-related cancer diagnosis, or no cancer diagnosis (the referent) reported at Wave II or III. The primary outcome was smoking cessation after diagnosis, at Wave IV. Results/Findings. Our sample was composed of 7,286 adult smokers at the baseline representing an estimated 40.9 million persons. Smoking cessation rates after a diagnosis differed after a tobacco-related cancer (25.9%), a nontobacco-related cancer (8.9%), and no cancer diagnosis (17.9%). After adjustment, diagnosis with a tobacco-related cancer was associated with a higher odds of smoking cessation (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.00-3.33) compared to no cancer diagnosis. Diagnosis with a nontobacco-related cancer was not significantly linked to smoking cessation (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.48-1.45). CONCLUSION: Diagnosis with a tobacco-related cancer is associated with greater odds of subsequent smoking cessation compared to no cancer diagnosis, suggesting that significant behavioral change may occur in this setting.

Population-Level Assessment of Smoking-Related Beliefs and Behaviors Among Survivors of Genitourinary Cancers: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior.

OBJECTIVE: To describe attitudes, perceptions, and beliefs related to smoking and smoking cessation among survivors of genitourinary cancers using a theory-based framework. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of Wave III of the PATH study, a prospective cohort survey study assessing tobacco-use patterns and attitudes among a representative population-based sample of US adults. All adult current smokers with a history of urologic cancer were included. Primary outcomes were mapped to components of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and included: attempts to quit, readiness to quit, plan to quit, being told to quit, peers views toward smoking, regret about smoking, the perceived relationship between smoking and cancer/overall health. Secondary outcomes include: time to first cigarette, utilization of smoking cessation aids. Population weighted percentages with 95% confidence intervals were estimated. RESULTS: Our cohort represents a population estimate of 461,182 adult current smokers with a history of genitourinary cancer. The majority of respondents (90%) perceived smoking to be harmful to one's health and 83% were regretful about having started smoking. An equal proportion of respondents indicated that they were "very ready to quit," "somewhat ready to quit," or "not ready to quit." Among all respondents, 73% had been told by a physician to quit in the past year but only 7% indicated that they had used prescription medication and only 21% had used nicotine replacement therapy to help with smoking cessation. CONCLUSION: There is significant variation in attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions related to smoking and smoking cessation among survivors of genitourinary malignancy. Patient-level smoking cessation interventions may need to be highly personalized for optimal success.

The association between patient experience and healthcare outcomes using SEER-CAHPS patient experience and outcomes among cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the relationship between patient experience, as measured by scores on the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) survey, and clinical and financial outcomes among older cancer survivors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed the records of all Fee-for-Service (FFS) Medicare beneficiaries 66 years and older who completed one CAHPS survey from 2001 to 2004 or 2007-2013 with one of the five following cancer types: breast, bladder, colorectal, lung, or prostate; and completed a CAHPS survey within 5 years of cancer diagnosis date. We conducted a multivariate analysis, controlling for clinical and demographic variables, to evaluate the association between excellent CAHPS scores and the following clinical and financial outcomes: mortality, emergency department visits, and total healthcare expenditures. RESULTS: A total of 7395 individuals were present in our cohort, with 57% being male and 85.7% non-Hispanic White. Breakdown of the cohort by cancer site is as follows: prostate (40.4%), breast (28.6%), colorectal (14.0%), lung (9.4%), and bladder (7.6%). When looking at the relationship between CAHPS scores and clinical outcomes, there was no significant difference between excellent and non-excellent CAHPS score respondents in all three of the clinical outcomes studied. Furthermore, there was no association between ED utilization and patient experience scores when stratifying by cancer site and race/ethnicity among this cohort. CONCLUSION: In this cohort, a highly rated patient experience, as measured by responses on the CAHPS survey, is not associated with improved clinical outcomes among older cancer survivors.

Implementation of Postoperative Standard Opioid Prescribing Schedules Reduces Opioid Prescriptions Without Change in Patient-reported Pain Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To implement Standard Opioid Prescribing Schedules (SOPS) based on opioid use following urologic surgeries and to evaluate how evidence-based prescribing schedules affect opioid use and patient reported outcomes. METHODS: Patients who underwent urologic surgeries within 6 procedure subtypes at UNC Health during the 2 study time periods ("pre-SOPS": 7/2017-1/2018, "post-SOPS": 7/2018-1/2019) were invited to complete a survey analyzing postoperative opioid usage, storage and disposal, and patient reported outcomes (including pain interference using a validated questionnaire). A pharmacy database provided medication prescribing data and patient demographics. During the pre-SOPS time period, baseline outcomes were measured. Following the pre-SOPS period, usage amounts were analyzed and Standard Opioid Prescribing Schedules were developed to guide prescriptions during the post-SOPS period. Descriptive summary statistics and appropriate t test or r2 were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 438 patients within 6 procedure types completed the survey (pre-SOPS: 282 patients, post-SOPS: 156 patients). Pre-SOPS, patients were prescribed significantly more 5-mg oxycodone tablets than used (20.9 vs 7.8, P <.001). Post-SOPS, compared to pre-SOPS amounts, patients were prescribed significantly fewer tablets (12.7 vs 20.9, P <.001) and used fewer tablets (5.3 vs 7.8, P = .003). No difference was observed in pain interference (average t-score (standard deviation): 54.33 (10.9) pre-SOPS vs 55.89 (9.1) post-SOPS, P = .125) or patient satisfaction (95% pre-SOPS vs 94% post-SOPS). CONCLUSION: Adherence to data-driven postoperative opioid prescribing schedules reduce opioid prescriptions and use without compromising pain interference or patient satisfaction. These results have important implications for urologists' ability to decrease opioid prescriptions and fight the opioid epidemic.

3D Printing, Augmented Reality, and Virtual Reality for the Assessment and Management of Kidney and Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Three-dimensional (3D) printing, augmented reality, and virtual reality technologies have an increasing presence in the management of prostate and kidney cancer. To assess the utility of 3D printing, augmented reality, and virtual reality for (1) quantitative outcomes, (2) surgical planning, (3) intraoperative guidance, (4) training and simulation, and (5) patient education for patients with kidney and prostate cancer a systematic literature review was performed. Existing evidence demonstrates improvement in clinical outcomes, surgical planning and intra-operative guidance, as well as training. Future studies are needed to assess the impact of 3D technologies on long-term patient-related outcomes.

Analysis of National Trends in Hospital Acquired Conditions Following Major Urologic Surgery Before and After Implementation of the Hospital Acquired Condition Reduction Program.

OBJECTIVE: To define the rates of common hospital acquired conditions (HACs) in patients undergoing major urologic surgery over a period of time encompassing the implementation of the Hospital Acquired Condition Reduction program, and to evaluate whether implementation of the HAC reimbursement penalties in 2008 was associated with a change in the rate of HACs. METHODS: Using American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data, we determined rates of HACs in patients undergoing major inpatient urologic surgery from 2005 to 2012. Rates were stratified by procedure type and approach (open vs laparoscopic and/or robotic). Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the association between year of surgery and HACs. RESULTS: We identified 39,257 patients undergoing major urologic surgery, of whom 2300 (5.9%) had at least one hospital acquired condition. Urinary tract infection (2.6%) was the most common, followed by surgical site infection (2.5%) and venous thrombotic events (0.7%). Multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated that open surgical approach, diabetes, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, weight loss, and American Society of Anesthesiology class were among the variables associated with higher likelihood of HAC. We observed a nonsignificant secular trend of decreasing rates of HAC from 7.4% to 5.8% HACs during the study period, which encompassed the implementation of the Hospital Acquired Condition Reduction program. CONCLUSION: HACs occurred at a rate of 5.9% after major urologic surgery, and are significantly affected by procedure type and patient health status. The rate of HAC appeared unaffected by National Reduction program in this cohort. Better understanding of the factors associated with HACs is critical in developing effective reduction programs.

Prediagnostic Risk Assessment with Prostate MRI and MRI-Targeted Biopsy.

Prostate MRI is commonly used in the detection of prostate cancer to reduce the detection of clinically insignificant disease; maximize the detection of clinically significant cancer; and better assess disease size, grade, and location. The clinical utility of MRI seems to apply to men with no prior biopsy, who have had a previous negative biopsy, and men who are candidate for active surveillance. In conjunction with traditional clinical parameters and secondary biomarkers, MRI may allow more accurate risk stratification and assessment of need for prostate biopsy.

AUA Policy Statement on the Use of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis, Staging and Management of Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: We summarize the available data about the clinical and economic effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer, and provide practical recommendations for its use in the screening, diagnosis, staging and surveillance of prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A panel of clinicians with expertise in the diagnosis and management of prostate cancer evaluated the current published literature on the use and effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging for this disease. When adequate studies were available for analysis, recommendations were made on the basis of data and when adequate studies were not available, recommendations were made on the basis of expert consensus. RESULTS: At this time the data support the use of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with a previous negative biopsy and ongoing concerns about increased risk of prostate cancer. The data regarding its usefulness for initial biopsy suggest a possible role for magnetic resonance imaging in some circumstances. There is currently insufficient evidence to recommend magnetic resonance imaging for screening, staging or surveillance of prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Although it adds cost to the management of prostate cancer, magnetic resonance imaging offers superior anatomic detail, and the ability to evaluate cellular density based on water diffusion and blood flow based on contrast enhancement. Imaging targeted biopsy may increase the diagnosis of clinically significant cancers by identifying specific lesions not visible on conventional ultrasound. The clinical indications for the use of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of prostate cancer are rapidly evolving.

Multiparametric MRI and targeted prostate biopsy: Improvements in cancer detection, localization, and risk assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Multiparametric-MRI (mp-MRI) is an evolving noninvasive imaging modality that increases the accurate localization of prostate cancer at the time of MRI targeted biopsy, thereby enhancing clinical risk assessment, and improving the ability to appropriately counsel patients regarding therapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We used MEDLINE/PubMed to conduct a comprehensive search of the English medical literature. Articles were reviewed, data was extracted, analyzed, and summarized. In this review, we discuss the mp-MRI prostate exam, its role in targeted prostate biopsy, along with clinical applications and outcomes of MRI targeted biopsies. RESULTS: Mp-MRI, consisting of T2-weighted imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging, and possibly MR spectroscopy, has demonstrated improved specificity in prostate cancer detection as compared to conventional T2-weighted images alone. An MRI suspicion score has been developed and is depicted using an institutional Likert or, more recently, a standardized reporting scale (PI-RADS). Techniques of MRI-targeted biopsy include in-gantry MRI guided biopsy, TRUS-guided visual estimation biopsy, and software co-registered MRI-US guided biopsy (MRI-US fusion). Among men with no previous biopsy, MRI-US fusion biopsy demonstrates up to a 20% increase in detection of clinically significant cancers compared to systematic biopsy while avoiding a significant portion of low risk disease. These data suggest a potential role in reducing over-detection and, ultimately, over-treatment. Among men with previous negative biopsy, 72-87% of cancers detected by MRI targeted biopsy are clinically significant. Among men with known low risk cancer, repeat biopsy by MR-targeting improves risk stratification in selecting men appropriate for active surveillance secondarily reducing the need for repetitive biopsy during surveillance. CONCLUSIONS: Use of mp-MRI for targeting prostate biopsies has the potential to reduce the sampling error associated with conventional biopsy by providing better disease localization and sampling. MRI-ultrasound fusion-targeted prostate biopsy may improve the identification of clinically significant prostate cancer while limiting detection of indolent disease, ultimately facilitating more accurate risk stratification. Literature supports the clinical applications of MRI-targeted biopsy in men who have never been biopsied before, those with a prior negative biopsy, and those with low risk disease considering active surveillance.

Optimization of prostate biopsy: the role of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy in detection, localization and risk assessment.

PURPOSE: Optimization of prostate biopsy requires addressing the shortcomings of standard systematic transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy, including false-negative rates, incorrect risk stratification, detection of clinically insignificant disease and the need for repeat biopsy. Magnetic resonance imaging is an evolving noninvasive imaging modality that increases the accurate localization of prostate cancer at the time of biopsy, and thereby enhances clinical risk assessment and improves the ability to appropriately counsel patients regarding therapy. In this review we 1) summarize the various sequences that comprise a prostate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging examination along with its performance characteristics in cancer detection, localization and reporting standards; 2) evaluate potential applications of magnetic resonance imaging targeting in prostate biopsy among men with no previous biopsy, a negative previous biopsy and those with low stage cancer; and 3) describe the techniques of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy and comparative study outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A bibliographic search covering the period up to October 2013 was conducted using MEDLINE®/PubMed®. Articles were reviewed and categorized based on which of the 3 objectives of this review was addressed. Data were extracted, analyzed and summarized. RESULTS: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging consists of anatomical T2-weighted imaging coupled with at least 2 functional imaging techniques. It has demonstrated improved prostate cancer detection sensitivity up to 80% in the peripheral zone and 81% in the transition zone. A prostate cancer magnetic resonance imaging suspicion score has been developed, and is depicted using the Likert or PI-RADS (Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System) scale for better standardization of magnetic resonance imaging interpretation and reporting. Among men with no previous biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging increases the frequency of significant cancer detection to 50% in low risk and 71% in high risk patients. In low risk men the negative predictive value of a combination of negative magnetic resonance imaging with prostate volume parameters is nearly 98%, suggesting a potential role in avoiding biopsy and reducing over detection/overtreatment. Among men with a previous negative biopsy 72% to 87% of cancers detected by magnetic resonance imaging guidance are clinically significant. Among men with a known low risk cancer, repeat biopsy using magnetic resonance targeting demonstrates a high likelihood of confirming low risk disease in low suspicion score lesions and of upgrading in high suspicion score lesions. Techniques of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy include visual estimation transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy; software co-registered magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound, transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy; and in-bore magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy. Although the improvement in accuracy and efficiency of visual estimation biopsy compared to systematic appears limited, co-registered magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound biopsy as well as in-bore magnetic resonance imaging guided biopsy appear to increase cancer detection rates in conjunction with increasing suspicion score. CONCLUSIONS: Use of magnetic resonance imaging for targeting prostate biopsies has the potential to reduce the sampling error associated with conventional biopsy by providing better disease localization and sampling. More accurate risk stratification through improved cancer sampling may impact therapeutic decision making. Optimal clinical application of magnetic resonance imaging targeted biopsy remains under investigation.

Race and insurance status are risk factors for orchiectomy due to testicular trauma.

PURPOSE: Race and insurance status independently predict outcome disparities after trauma. Black patients, Hispanic patients, uninsured patients and patients who live farther from trauma centers have a worse outcome after trauma than others. To our knowledge it is unknown whether these factors have a role in the testicular salvage rate after testicular trauma. We used NTDB (National Trauma Data Bank®) to investigate whether socioeconomic status, race and rural location predict testicular salvage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who sustained testicular trauma were identified in NTDB, version 9.1. Procedure codes for orchiectomy vs testicular repair were used to determine the risk of testicular salvage. Rural location was determined by matching the injury with the urban influence code. Univariate analysis of the influence of patient age, injury severity, race, insurance status and rural location was performed. Multivariate longitudinal analysis was done to identify orchiectomy predictors. RESULTS: Of 635,013 trauma cases 980 (0.2%) involved testicular injury. Of these patients 108 (11.0%) underwent orchiectomy and 58 (5.9%) underwent testicular repair. Self-paying patients had a statistically higher rate of orchiectomy than those with private insurance (79.2% vs 48.0%, p = 0.006). Black patients had a statistically higher rate of orchiectomy than white patients (75.8% vs 53.7%, p = 0.009). No difference in the orchiectomy rate was seen between Hispanic and nonHispanic patients (68.0% vs 65.8%, p = 0.84). In terms of rurality the incidence location was similar for orchiectomy and testicular repair, including urban 46.3% and 39.7%, rural 6.5% and 3.5%, suburban 2.8% and 1.7%, and wilderness 0.9% and 3.5%, respectively (p = 0.55). No statistically significant differences were found in age (31 vs 29 years, p = 0.42), injury severity score (5.8 vs 5.8, p = 0.99), hospital stay (8.4 vs 6.7 days, p = 0.41), intensive care unit stay (14.4 vs 9.6 days, p = 0.41) or ventilator days (18.2 vs 10.2, p = 0.24) for orchiectomy and testicular repair cases. CONCLUSIONS: Although age, injury severity score, hospital stay, intensive care unit stay and days of ventilator support are similar for patients who underwent orchiectomy vs testicular repair, the orchiectomy rate was higher for uninsured and black patients. Further studies are needed to elucidate the reasons for this disparity. Standardized protocols to manage testicular injury may decrease these disparities.