Legal claims and bias in creating clinical practice guidelines: Which step in which direction?

Boscolo‐Berto, Rafael

doi:10.1111/j.1442-2042.2010.02501.x

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Considering this, hypothesizing that a iatrogenic lesion to the deep venous system/corpus spongiosum may have caused a penile Mondor's disease is unreal. Moreover, despite the presumed general role of local inflammation onto the prostate gland (10), the absence of any scientific report of a possible association between injuries to the corpus spongiosum and hypercoagulation disorders of superficial venous district (11)(12)(13) strengthens the evidence that the prostate biopsy might not be surely related to the penile Mondor's disease, as far as we know to date. In conclusion, critically evaluating the clinical picture and the procedure adopted for the prostatic biopsy, we were able to correlate the onset of the high-flow priapism to a technical error of the biopsy, while no connections between this procedure and the penile Mondor's disease were identified.…”

Section: Case Reportmentioning

confidence: 93%

Determinism and Liability in Complication of Prostate Biopsy

et al. 2011

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report the case of a 53-year-old man suffering from the contemporary onset of penile Mondor's disease and high-flow priapism 10 days after a transrectal prostate biopsy. We analyzed whether these pathological conditions were causally related to the biopsy, and the role of urologist regarding the onset of one or both the diseases. Critically evaluating the clinical picture and the procedure used for the biopsy, we were able to recognize a connection between the office procedure and the onset of the high-flow priapism, otherwise than for penile Mondor's disease. Our report is of value for urologists, making them aware of such possible complications, and for forensic experts that might have to deal with similar cases, as it demonstrates only a partial involvement of urologist in this clinical setting.

show abstract

Section: Case Reportmentioning

confidence: 93%