Corrigendum to "RPN (Radius, Position of tumour, iNvasion of renal sinus) Classification and Nephrometry Scoring System: An Internationally Developed Clinical Classification To Describe the Surgical Difficulty for Renal Masses for Which Robotic Partial Nephrectomy Is Planned" [Eur. Urol. Open Sci. 54 (2023) 33-42].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.05.007.].

Prospective double-blind preoperative pain clinic screening before microsurgical denervation of the spermatic cord in patients with testicular pain syndrome.

Testicular pain syndrome (TPS), defined as an intermittent or constant pain in one or both testicles for at least 3 months, resulting in significant reduction of daily activities, is common. Microsurgical denervation of the spermatic cord (MDSC) has been suggested as an effective treatment option. The study population comprised 180 TPS patients admitted to our outpatient urology clinic between 1999 and 2011. On 3 different occasions, patients were offered a double-blind, placebo-controlled temporary blockade of the spermatic cord. A single blockade consisted of 10 mL 2% lidocaine, 10 mL 0.25% bupivacaine, or 10 mL 0.9% sodium chloride. If the results of these blockades were positive, MDSC was offered. All MDSCs were performed by a single urologist (M.T.W.T.L.) using an inguinal approach. Pain reduction was determined at prospective follow-up. This study evaluated 180 patients. Most patients (61.1%) had undergone a scrotal or inguinal procedure. Patients had complaints during sexual activities (51.7%), sitting (37.5%), and/or cycling (36.7%); 189 randomized blockades were offered to all patients. There was a positive response in 37% and a negative response in 51%. MDSC was performed on 58 testicular units, including 3 patients with a negative outcome of the blockades. At mean follow-up of 42.8 months, 86.2% had a ≥ 50% reduction of pain and 51.7% were completely pain free. MDSC is a valuable treatment option for TPS patients because in this study 86.2% experienced a ≥ 50% reduction of pain. To prevent superfluous diagnostics and treatment, it is mandatory to follow a systematic protocol in the treatment of TPS.

[Removal from the Dutch healthcare professionals register: considerations taken into account by the disciplinary tribunal from 2006 to 2011]. / Doorhalingen in het BIG-register: overwegingen van het tuchtcollege in de periode 2006-2011.

OBJECTIVE: Investigation into the considerations taken into account by the central and regional disciplinary tribunals for the health service (CTG and RTG) in cases where a doctor was permanently removed from the national professional register. DESIGN: Retrospective study of jurisprudence and literature. METHOD: A search was carried out for jurisprudential cases in which doctors were removed from the professional register during the period January 2006-December 2011, using the following sources: the websites of the disciplinary tribunals, the Dutch Government Gazette (Staatscourant) and two journals concerned with healthcare law. The verdicts were analysed, general statistical records were kept and categories for the consideration were set up on the basis of short, characteristic quotations from the verdicts. These verdicts were subsequently re-examined and divided into these categories. RESULTS: A total of 34 verdicts concerning 13 different physicians were found in the study period. There were 17 verdicts from the RTGs and 16 verdicts from the CTG. One verdict was pronounced by the Medical Supervisory Board (CMT). In 12 cases the final verdict was permanent removal from the professional register. In one case the CTG imposed a lower sanction than that earlier imposed by the RTG. The most common considerations taken into account by removal from the professional register were the combination of medical-technical errors, incomplete and/or inaccurate maintenance of patient records and the doctor's attitude towards his or her own actions. CONCLUSION: Removal from the professional register is rarely imposed. In most cases, an accumulation of obvious errors is involved. Improper sexual behaviour is also punished severely. Acting in accordance with professional medical standards, adequate medical record-keeping and self-reflection are important factors in the prevention of this sanction.