Global, regional, and national burden of kidney, bladder, and prostate cancers and their attributable risk factors, 1990-2019.

BACKGROUND: The burden of kidney, bladder, and prostate cancers has changed in recent decades. This study aims to investigate the global and regional burden of, and attributable risk factors for genitourinary cancers during the past 30 years. METHODS: We extracted data of kidney, bladder, and prostate cancers from the Global Burden of Disease 2019 database, including incidence, mortality, disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and attributable risk factors from 1990 to 2019. Estimated annual percentage changes (EAPC) were calculated to assess the changes in age-standardized incidence rate, age-standardized mortality rate (ASMR), and age-standardized DALYs rate (ASDR). The associations between cancers burden and socio-demographic index (SDI) were also analyzed. RESULTS: Compared with 1990, the global incident cases in 2019 were higher by 154.78%, 123.34%, and 169.11% for kidney, bladder, and prostate cancers, respectively. During the 30-year study period, there was a downward trend in ASMR and ASDR for bladder cancer (EAPC = - 0.68 and - 0.83, respectively) and prostate cancer (EAPC = - 0.75 and - 0.71, respectively), but an upward trend for kidney cancer (EAPC = 0.35 and 0.12, respectively). Regions and countries with higher SDI had higher incidence, mortality, and DALYs for all three types of cancers. The burden of bladder and prostate cancers was mainly distributed among older men, whereas the burden of kidney cancer increased among middle-aged men. Smoking related mortality and DALYs decreased, but high body mass index (BMI) and high fasting plasma glucose (FPG) related mortality and DALYs increased among kidney, bladder, and prostate cancers during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Kidney, bladder, and prostate cancers remain major global public health challenges, but with distinct trend for different disease entity across different regions and socioeconomic status. More proactive intervention strategies, at both the administrative and academic levels, based on the dynamic changes, are needed.

[Therapeutic efficacy of bipolar plasmakinetic technique compared with transurethral resection on benign prostate hyperplasia].

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect and safety of transurethral prostatectomy with the bipolar plasmakinetic technique (PKRP) compared with the transurethral resection (TURP) in the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). METHOD: Four hundred BPH patients with matched lesions were divided into 2 groups: 200 patients, aged 74.1 (58-91), underwent transurethral prostatectomy with PKRP, and 200 patients, aged 73.8 (56-90), underwent TURP. RESULT: In the PKRP group the average IPSS decreased from 27.1 +/- 4.5 preoperatively to 11.3 +/- 3.4 postoperatively 6 months after (P < 0.01), the. average maximum flow-rate Q (max) increased from 6.1 +/- 2.4 ml/s preoperatively to 18.6 +/- 3.5 ml/s postoperatively (P < 0.01), and the average residual urine (RU) reduced from 102.3 +/- 43.3 ml preoperatively to 22.6 +/- 16.3 ml after the operation (P < 0.01). However in the TURP group the average IPSS decreased from 26.9 +/- 4.2 preoperatively to 10.8 +/- 3.6 6 months after the operation (P < 0.01), the Q (max) increased from 5.7 +/- 2.4 ml/s preoperatively to 19.1 +/- 3.7 ml/s postoperatively (P < 0.01), and the average RU decreased from 102.3 +/- 43.3 ml preoperatively to 22.6 +/- 16.3 ml after the operation (P < 0.01). There were no significant differences in these parameters between these 2 groups (all P > 0.05). The average catheter retention time was 31.5 h in the PKRP, significantly shorter than that in the TURP group (61.5 hours, P < 0.01). The incidence rate of post-operational asynodia in the PKRP group was 14.3%, not significantly different from that in the TURP group (15.2%, P > 0.05). During the operation no hemorrhage or transurethral resection syndrome (TURS) occurred in the PKRP group, however, there were 5 cases of TURS and 18 cases of blood transfusion in the TURP group. CONCLUSION: PKRP has the same therapeutic efficacy as TURP on BPH. Moreover, it was more cheaper and with lower complication than TURP.