No abstract

Objectives: Analyze the oncologic and functional outcomes in patients affected by low risk prostate cancer underwent prostate cryotherapy. Materiasl and methods: It’s a prospective tricentric study of 434 patients treated with prostate cryoablation for low risk prostate cancer. By low risk we refer to the D'Amico’s risk classification. Two cycles of freezing/thawing are run for each patient following the technique described by Onik. Results: For the 434 patients, the median age was 66 years with a standard deviation of ± 6.68, the average PSA was 6.17 ng/d/L, the median 5.55 with a standard deviation of ± 2.13, the mean prostate volume was 35.59 cc, the median 34.00 cc, with a standard deviation of ± 7.89. Biochemical failure occurred in 67 patients (15.4%). Pre-operative erectile function in men was distributed as follows: severe in 95 patients (19.2%), moderate in 95 (19.2%), medium-moderate in 180 (36.4%), mild in 92 (18.6%), with no dysfunction in 32 (6.5%) patients. Post-operative erectile function, measured 1 month after cryotherapy, was distributed as follows: severe in 321 (65%) patients, moderate in 69 (14%), medium-moderate in 79 (16%), mild in 23 (4.7%), and no dysfunction in only 2 patients (0.4%). Post-operative erectile function after 3 months was distributed as follows: severe in 233 (47.2%) patients, moderate in 66 (13.4%), medium-moderate in 122 (24.7%), mild in 65 (13.2%), and no dysfunction in 8 patients (1.6%). Urinary incontinence was present in 21 patients (4.8%) after 3 months while it dropped to 13 patients (2.9%) after 6 months. Conclusions: Cryotherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer remains a viable alternative. The availability of new cryoprobes and the use of new diagnostic means such as fusion magnetic resonance will make this more precise and more effective method.

Modern immunosuppressive therapy has produced a real revolution in renal and organ transplantation but it comes with the price of multiple side effects. There are many gastrointestinal (GI) complications that are the consequence of transplant immunosuppressant medication. In fact, for any immunosuppressant therapy, certain standardized precepts and attitudes that aim to reduce the incidence and the impact of the medication side effects must be applied. Many patients undergo renal transplantation and the physicians have to be aware of the advantages and the risks associated. This article reviews the main GI complications that may arise as a consequence of immunosuppressive therapy after solid organ transplantation, focusing on renal and renal/pancreas transplantation, as well as the ways in which the incidence of these complications can be reduced. Management of the post-transplant therapy is mandatory in order to increase not only the grafts’ and the patients’ survival, but also their quality of life by the occurrence of fewer complications. Abbreviations: Aza: azathioprine; CMV: cytomegalovirus; CsA: cyclosporine A; GI: gastrointestinal; MMF: mycophenolate mofetil; NSAID: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; Tac: tacrolimus.

No abstract

No abstract