747 ORGAN PRESERVING SURGERY FOR PENILE CANCER – DESCRIPTION OF TECHNIQUES AND SURGICAL OUTCOMES

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyPenis/Testis/Urethra: Benign & Malignant Disease II1 Apr 2012747 ORGAN PRESERVING SURGERY FOR PENILE CANCER – DESCRIPTION OF TECHNIQUES AND SURGICAL OUTCOMES Rajan Veeratterapillay, Aluru Pavan, Susan asterling, Sam Rao, and Damien Greene Rajan VeeratterapillayRajan Veeratterapillay Sunderland, United Kingdom More articles by this author , Aluru PavanAluru Pavan Sunderland, United Kingdom More articles by this author , Susan asterlingSusan asterling Sunderland, United Kingdom More articles by this author , Sam RaoSam Rao Durham, United Kingdom More articles by this author , and Damien GreeneDamien Greene Sunderland, United Kingdom More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.833AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Traditionally, radical surgery or radiotherapy has been used for malignant penile lesions with little thought to organ preservation. Recent evidence has paved the way for glansectomy and wide local excision for management of penile cancer confined to the glans. METHODS Patients at Sunderland Hospital (UK) between 2001 and 2008 who had squamous cell tumours limited to the glans penis underwent penile preserving surgery including total glansectomy and glanuloplasty, partial glansectomy, glans relining and distal penectomy with glans reconstruction. Recurrence rates, cosmetic and functional outcomes were recorded. RESULTS 65 patients were identified with a median followup of 40 months. Local recurrence was present in 4 patients (6%) despite 72% having intermediate or poorly differentiated tumours and 30% with T2 disease. Complications included partial graft loss (1.5%), graft contractures (4.5%), meatal stenosis (7.5%) and positive margin (3%). 5%were deemed to have poor cosmetic outcome and 85% described good erections at one year postop. CONCLUSIONS Penile preserving surgery can achieve good penile cancer control with minimal morbidity and reduced psychosexual side effects. © 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 187Issue 4SApril 2012Page: e306 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2012 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Rajan Veeratterapillay Sunderland, United Kingdom More articles by this author Aluru Pavan Sunderland, United Kingdom More articles by this author Susan asterling Sunderland, United Kingdom More articles by this author Sam Rao Durham, United Kingdom More articles by this author Damien Greene Sunderland, United Kingdom More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...