Distal urethral carcinoma: Contemporary management with phallus preserving techniques.

INTRODUCTION: Primary urethral carcinoma is a rare clinical entity with an incidence of 1 case per million in the United Kingdom. Cancers of the distal urethra are most commonly of squamous subtype and often associated with Human Papilloma Virus infection. Penile preserving techniques are recommended in tumours of the pendulous urethra with a number of surgical approaches described. Herein, we describe the surgical management of 7 patients presenting with primary urethral carcinoma. METHODS: Seven patients diagnosed with primary urethral carcinoma of the distal urethra were identified using a prospectively maintained penile cancer database at our institution from May 2017 to November 2020. RESULTS: The mean age at presentation was 56.5 (33-80) years. Presenting symptoms included visible lesion, LUTS and a groin mass. Three patients had lesions located within the glanular urethra and had a distal urethrectomy and primary closure. Two patients with lesions extending proximal to the glanular urethra and into or beyond the fossa navicularis had a distal urethrectomy with a hypospadic neomeatus formation. One patient with tumour extending into the glans penis underwent distal urethrectomy and partial glansectomy with split thickness skin graft. A partial penectomy was performed for one patient with urethral tumour invading the corporal heads. Mean follow-up was 23.4 (±17.0) months. There have been no disease recurrences to date. CONCLUSION: Penile preserving techniques are feasible in patients with tumours of the pendulous urethra and do not appear to compromise local control.

Assessment of referral patterns for boys with suspected undescended testes and identification of risk factors to aid diagnosis.

INTRODUCTION: Undescended testis (UDT) is a clinical diagnosis and a common reason for referral to paediatric urology outpatients. Our aim was to assess current referral patterns at our unit and to identify predictive factors that may better aid primary care physicians (PCP) in diagnosing UDT based on history and physical exam. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of referrals to outpatients from 2014 to 2016 was performed to assess current referral patterns including referral source, age, reason for referral and outcome following assessment by a single consultant paediatric urologist.A prospective analysis of new referrals was performed to identify predictive factors which may aid in the diagnosis of UDT including gestational age, presence of scrotal asymmetry and previously obtained imaging. RESULTS: From 2014 to 2016, 259 boys were referred with suspected UDT. The majority of referrals were received from PCPs (62%) followed by Neonatology (29%), Paediatrics (8%) and general surgery (1%). Median age at time of assessment was 29 (5-180) months. One hundred and eight (41.7%) boys were diagnosed with UDT.There were 74 boys assessed prospectively. Median age at assessment was 24.5 (6-171) months. We identified 3 predictors of a diagnosis of UDT; history of prematurity (p = 0.001), UDT mentioned to the parents at birth (p = 0.027) and scrotal asymmetry on examination (p < 0.001). Greatest diagnostic inaccuracy was found in boys referred beyond one year of age (27.7%). In this cohort, the absence of all three risk factors was associated with a negative predictive value of 94.1%. CONCLUSION: The majority of boys with suspected UDT are referred beyond the age recommended for orchidopexy (6-12 months). The majority of boys referred for assessment did not have UDT. We have identified three predictive factors that may aid referring physicians when assessing boys, particularly those older than 1 year.