1,721,037 research outputs found
Dall'erba spaccapietre alla medicina ayurvedica. Attualità sulle cosiddette medicine non convenzionali in urologia.
No full text
Handling and pathology reporting of specimens with carcinoma of the urinary bladder, ureter, and renal pelvis
No full text
TUR AND ADJUVANT INTRAVESCICAL CHEMOTHERAPY IN T1G3 BLADDER TUMORS. RECURRENCE, PROGRESSION AND SURVIVAL IN 137 SELECTED PATIENTS FOLLOWED UP TO 20 YEARS.
No full textAbstract
OBJECTIVES:
To evaluate a highly selected population of patients affected by T1G3 bladder transitional cell carcinoma (TCCB) treated by transurethral resection (TUR) and adjuvant intravesical chemotherapy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS:
Between January 1976 and April 1999, 137 patients with T1G3 TCCB were treated by TUR plus intravesical chemotherapy. Particularly, a sequential combination of mitomycin C (MMC) and epirubicin (EPI) was adopted in 91 patients (66.4%). The main exclusion criteria were concomitant or previous Tis, previous T1G3 TCCB, tumor size greater than 3 centimeters and number of tumors more than 3. TUR was repeated if a superficial tumor recurred. Patients went off study if Tis, recurrent T1G3 or invasive tumor were detected during treatment or thereafter. Adjuvant therapy, recurrence and progression were considered in multivariate analysis regarding recurrence, progression and survival respectively.
RESULTS:
Observation period was up to 240 months with a minimum of 2 years in 112 patients (82%). Seventy patients (51%) recurred. The recurring tumor was again a T1G3 in 22 (16%) patients. Thirteen patients (9.5%) progressed. The 5-year progression-free survival rate was 90%. Median progression-free survival was 149 months. Twenty-two patients (16%) died, 9 (6.6%) of whom due to bladder cancer. Median overall survival was 155 months. The 3- and 5-year disease-free overall survival rates were 89% and 80% respectively. Ten cystectomies (7.3%) were performed. In conclusion, 123 patients (90%) maintained their intact bladder with a mean disease-free overall survival of 104 months. The sequential combination of MMC and EPI adjuvant therapy resulted more effective to be than single drug chemotherapy on recurrence rate (p=0.0021) but had no impact upon progression (p=0.127) and specific survival (p=0.163). Progression (p<0.001) after conservative treatment was the main prognostic factor for survival.
CONCLUSION:
A conservative approach is an appropriate therapeutic option for the initial management of selected T1G3 bladder tumors
Risultati di uno studio piolota di fase I-II con gemcitabina endovescicale nel tumore vescicale superficiale (Ta-T1).
No full textPROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED, CROSSOVER COMPARISON OF SUBLINGUAL APOMORPHINE (3 mg) WITH ORAL SILDENAFIL (50 mg) FOR MALE ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION
No full textPurpose: We established the efficacy and safety of sublingual apomorphine compared with oral sildenafil in comparable groups of patients with erectile dysfunction (ED).
Materials and Methods: This prospective, randomized, crossover study included 77 heterosexual men with ED of various etiologies and severities. A total of 62 men were randomized but only 34 were evaluable for efficacy and tolerability. The study started with a run-in period of 2 to 4 weeks. The first 4 weeks of treatment were followed by a washout period of 4 weeks, after which patients changed to the alternate treatment for an additional 4-week period. The sequence of the 2 treatments was established by a randomization list in blocks in closed packets. The primary efficacy end point was the percent of attempts resulting in erection firm enough for intercourse. Additional variables were the percent of attempts resulting in intercourse and improvement in ED, as evaluated by the erectile function domain score of the International Index of Erectile Function questionnaire.
Results: Sildenafil was significantly more effective than apomorphine in regard to the percent of attempts resulting in erection firm enough for intercourse (85% vs 44%, p <0.0001) and actually resulting in intercourse (81% vs 43%, p <0.0001) as well as erectile function evaluated by the erectile function domain score of the International Index of Erectile Function (p <0.001). The incidence of adverse events was not significantly different for the 2 drugs. Although the number of patients was small, this study had strong statistical power due to the striking difference in results.
Conclusions: Sildenafil was significantly more effective than apomorphine for ED. No statistical difference in adverse events was noted
Prospective, randomized, crossover comparison of sublingual apomorphine (3 mg) with oral sildenafil (50 mg) for male erectile dysfunction.
No full textAbstract: Purpose: We established the efficacy and safety of sublingual apomorphine compared with oral sildenafil. in comparable groups of patients with erectile dysfunction (ED).
Materials and Methods: This prospective, randomized, crossover study included 77 heterosexual men with ED of various etiologies and severities. A total of 62 men were randomized but only 34 were evaluable for efficacy and tolerability. The study started with a run-in period of 2 to 4 weeks. The first 4 weeks of treatment were followed by a washout period of 4 weeks, after which patients changed to the alternate treatment for an additional 4-week period. The sequence of the 2 treatments was established by a randomization list in blocks in closed packets. The primary efficacy end point was the percent of attempts resulting in erection firm enough for intercourse. Additional variables were the percent of attempts resulting in intercourse and improvement in ED, as evaluated by the erectile function domain score of the International Index of Erectile Function questionnaire.
Results: Sildenafil was significantly more effective than apomorphine in regard to the percent of attempts resulting in erection firm enough for intercourse (85% vs 44%, p <0.0001) and actually resulting in intercourse (81% vs 43%, p <0.0001) as well as erectile function evaluated by the erectile function domain score of the International Index of Erectile Function (p <0.001). The incidence of adverse events was not significantly different for the 2 drugs. Although the number of patients was small, this study had strong statistical power due to the striking difference in results.
Conclusions: Sildenafil was significantly more effective than apomorphine for ED. No statistical difference in adverse events was noted
- …
