Local treatment with a polycarbophil-based cream in postmenopausal women with genitourinary syndrome of menopause.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) is a common problem associated with lower urinary tract and gynecological symptoms due to the decrease in estrogen production in postmenopausal women. Topical estrogen therapy is shown to improve these symptoms; nonetheless, there are limited data on the efficacy of nonhormonal moisturizers in these patients. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted to compare the symptoms of GSM before and after treatment with a polycarbophil-based cream in 42 women. The quality of life (QoL) and sexual scores were obtained from the Thai version of the International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire-Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (ICIQ-LUTS) along with uroflow measurements before and 4 and 12 weeks after treatment. RESULTS: Significant improvements in ICIQ-LUTSqol scores were observed after 4 weeks (9.38 ± 7.47 vs 6.76 ± 5.77; p = 0.017) and 12 weeks (10.03 ± 7.49 vs 5.97 ± 4.02; p = 0.002) when compared with the baseline values before treatment. The ICIQ-LUTS sexual scores were also improved after treatment at 4 weeks (2.29 ± 2.26 vs 0.88 ± 1.34; p < 0.001) and 12 weeks (2.13 ± 2.22 vs 0.42 ± 0.81; p < 0.001) compared with the baseline scores. No differences in ICIQ-LUTSqol and sexual scores were observed between the 4- and 12-week treatment groups. CONCLUSION: The polycarbophil-based cream improved the overall LUTS and sexual symptoms in the patients with GSM, thus indicating that the nonhormonal polycarbophil-based cream may prove effective for the treatment for women with this condition.

Radical prostatectomy outcomes in renal transplant recipients: a retrospective case series of Thai patients.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of prostate cancer in renal transplant recipients (RTR) is similar to the general population. Radical prostatectomy (RP) is the standard of care in the management of clinically localized cancer, but is considered complicated due to the presence of adhesions, and the location of transplanted ureter/kidney. To date, a few case series or studies on RP in RTR have been published, especially in Asian patients. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety and report the experience with RP on RTR. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data of 1270 patients who underwent RP from January 2008 to March 2020, of which 5 patients were RTR. All available baseline characteristics, perioperative and postoperative data (operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), complications, length of hospital stay, complication), pathological stage, Gleason score, surgical margin status, and pre/postoperative creatinine were reviewed. RESULTS: Of the 5 RTR who underwent RPs (1 open radical prostatectomy (ORP), 1 laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), 2 robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies (RALRP), and 1 Retzius-sparing RALRP (RS-RALRP)) prostatectomy, the mean age (± SD) was 70 (± 5.62) years. In LRP and RALRP cases, the standard ports were moved slightly medially to prevent graft injury. The mean operative time ranged from 190 to 365 min. The longest operative time and highest EBL (630 ml) was the ORP case due to severe adhesion in Retzius space. For LRP and RALRP cases, the operative times seemed comparable and had EBL of ≤ 300 ml. All RPs were successful without any major intra-operative complication. There was no significant change in graft function. The restorations of urinary continence were within 1 month in RS-RALRP, approximately 6 months in RALRP, and about 1 year in ORP and LRP. Three patients with positive surgical margins had prostate-specific antigen (PSA) persistence at the first follow-up and 1 had later PSA recurrence. Two patients with negative margins were free from biochemical recurrence at 47 and 3 months after their RP. CONCLUSIONS: Our series suggested that all RP techniques are safe and feasible mode of treatment for localized prostate cancer in RTR.

Mini ECIRS with BotX: our single-case experience.

Minimally invasive endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery has become the gold standard procedure for the treatment of large kidney stones. However, one of the most important critical success factors is the level of precision during renal accession, which requires a long learning curve. Robot-assisted fluoroscopy-guided renal access has been developed to address this difficulty. We report here the case of a 63-year-old woman presenting with a very large renal calculus whose treatment was successful using a robot-assisted fluoroscopy-guided minimally invasive endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery with suction sheath. The entire stone was cleared, and the patient recovered well with an absence of adverse events.

Impact of Testosterone Therapy on Major Cardiovascular Risk in Erectile Dysfunction Patients with Testosterone Deficiency.

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate major adverse cardiovascular events in erectile dysfunction (ED) patients who received testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) compared with those who did not. Materials and Methods: From January 2012 to October 2021, we collected the retrospective data of patients with ED at Ramathibodi Hospital. We divided the patients into two groups: those who received TRT (TRT group) and those with normal testosterone levels and therefore not requiring TRT (non-TRT group). The patients' baseline clinicodemographic data were collected. Major adverse cardiovascular events, including cardiovascular death, ST- and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, hospitalization from congestive heart failure, transient ischemic attack, and ischemic stroke, were collected and analyzed within 2 years after treatment in all groups. Results: Of the 221 patients, 111 were in the TRT group and 110 were in the non-TRT group. In the non-TRT group, one event each of the following occurred: myocardial infarction, transient ischemic attack, and stroke. In the TRT group, no major cardiovascular event occurred during the 2-year follow-up period. However, no significant difference in major cardiovascular events was noted between the two groups (p = 0.314). Conclusion: TRT in ED patients with testosterone deficiency does not increase adverse cardiovascular events when compared with ED patients with normal testosterone level.

Neoadjuvant Androgen Deprivation Therapy Effects on Perioperative Outcomes Prior to Radical Prostatectomy: Eleven Years of Experiences at Ramathibodi Hospital.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to demonstrate the efficacy of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (NADT) on perioperative outcomes in patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2008 to July 2018, we collected retrospective data of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer who underwent RP to assess their perioperative and pathological outcomes. The data included age, body mass index (BMI), serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) level, clinical stage, neoadjuvant ADT usage, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), perioperative complications, blood transfusion rate, adjacent organ injury rate, length of hospital stay, pathological stage, Gleason score (GS) of the biopsy and pathological specimen, specimen weight (g), and margin status. RESULTS: Of the 718 RPs performed, 138 (19.22%) were NADT and 580 (80.78%) were non-NADT. Patients who underwent NADT had a significant benefit in operative time (185 vs 195 mins), EBL (300 vs 500 mL) and specimen weight. These benefits were more obvious in non-low risk prostate cancer with less operative time, EBL, blood transfusion rate, length of hospital stay and specimen weight. However, the margin status and adjacent organ injury rate were similar in the NADT and non-NADT groups. CONCLUSION: NADT provides significantly better perioperative outcomes, especially in non-low risk prostate cancer, and has comparable pathological outcomes.

Efficacy of the Orally Disintegrating Strip Sildenafil for the Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction: A Prospective, Randomized Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors are the predominant treatment option for erectile dysfunction. AIM: This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of sildenafil orally disintegrating strips for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. METHODS: One hundred twenty erectile dysfunction patients were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, controlled crossover study and allocated into 2 groups of 60 participants. Patients were either treated with sildenafil strips or tablets for 8 weeks after which they crossed over into the alternate treatment formulation for another 8 weeks following a 4-week wash-out period. Each participant was assessed 8 times throughout the study period and their formulation preference registered at the end of the study. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Changes in the abridged International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) score and Erection Hardness Score (EHS) resulting from sildenafil orally disintegrating strip or tablet treatments were the primary end points, with differences in onset of action, duration of action, and incidence of adverse events between the 2 formulations included as secondary end points. RESULTS: Both sildenafil formulations were effective in treating patients with erectile dysfunction. There was significant improvement of erectile function in term of IIEF-5 score and EHS from both formulations. The number and type of adverse events were also comparable. Likewise, there were no statistically significant differences between the earliest onset of action times and longest duration of action times. However, the results showed a 7.1-minute earlier onset of action time for orally disintegrating strips that may be considered as clinically meaningful by some patients. CONCLUSION: Sildenafil orally disintegrating strips are a safe and effective alternative to the conventional tablet formulation for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Sangkum P, Sirisopana K, Matang W, et al. Efficacy of the Orally Disintegrating Strip Sildenafil for the Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction: A Prospective, Randomized Trial. Sex Med 2021;9:100453.

Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) and LRP in patients with prostate cancer based on risk groups.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the perioperative and pathological outcomes between robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) and LRP based on the patient's risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The medical records of 588 patients with prostate cancer who underwent RP, using minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques (240 LRP and 348 RALRP) by a single surgeon during January 2008 to June 2018 at the Ramathibodi Hospital, were retrospectively reviewed. The patient's risk was classified according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guideline, 2018. The demographic, perioperative, and pathological data of patients were collected. The differences in perioperative and pathological outcomes between LRP and RALRP in each risk classification were assessed using chi-square, Fisher's exact tests and logistic regression, as appropriate. RESULTS: In terms of positive margins, RALRP had significant advantages in high-risk patients when compared to LRP (adjusted odds ratio 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.26-0.84), while there were no differences in the low- and intermediate-risk patients. Overall, the patients who underwent RALRP had significant advantages over those who underwent LRP in terms of operative time, estimate blood loss, and blood transfusion rate. While, adjacent organ injury rate and length of hospital stay were similar for both techniques in all subgroup analyses. CONCLUSION: MIS techniques appear to be safe, especially RALRP, which has significantly better perioperative outcomes in all subgroups of patient risk classification, and in the high-risk patient group it seems to have better pathological outcomes when compared to LRP. ABBREVIATIONS: EBL: estimated blood loss; LOS: length of hospital stay; PSM: positive surgical margin; (L)(O)(RAL)RP: (laparoscopic) (open) (robot-assisted laparoscopic) radical prostatectomy; MIS: minimally invasive surgery.

Perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open radical prostatectomy: 10 years of cases at Ramathibodi Hospital.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare the perioperative and pathological outcomes of open radical prostatectomy (ORP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) at Ramathibodi Hospital within Mahidol University in Thailand. METHODS: From January 2008 to July 2017, 679 RPs were performed. Patients' data were collected retrospectively to evaluate their perioperative and pathological outcomes. This data included the age, body mass index (BMI), serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) level, clinical stage, Gleason score (GS) from biopsy, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), perioperative complications, blood transfusion rate, adjacent organ injury rate, length of hospital stay, pathological stage, GS of the biopsy specimen, specimen weight (g), and marginal status of the patients. RESULTS: Of the 679 RPs performed, 128 (19.28%) were ORPs, 241 (36.30%) were LRPs, and 295 (44.43%) were RALRPs. Patients who underwent a RALRP had a significant advantage in EBL (1,600, 500, and 300 mL for ORPs, LRPs, and RALRPs, respectively), overall complications, and blood transfusion rate. As they are minimally invasive techniques, LRP and RALRP presented an advantage in terms of the length of hospital stay (an average of 9, 6, and 6 days for ORPs, LRPs, and RALRPs, respectively) and adjacent organ injury rate. ORPs also had the shortest operative time (160, 210, and 200 min for ORPs, LRPs, and RALRPs, respectively). However, the specimen weight and marginal status were similar in all of the techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive RP techniques, such as LRPs and RALRPs, appear to be safe, have significantly better perioperative outcomes than ORPs, and have comparable pathological outcomes to those of ORPs.