Background And Objective: Clinical practice guidelines for prostate cancer (PCa) are a valuable resource for everyday clinical practice. The clinical practice guidelines and recommendations produced by various societies should demonstrate a considerable level of consistency in terms of quality, regardless of the society that developed these given the common evidence base. However, to date, no study has assessed the quality of PCa clinical practice guidelines.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBackground And Objective: The European Association of Urology (EAU)-European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)-European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO)-European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)-International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP)-International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) guidelines provide recommendations for the management of clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa). This paper aims to present a summary of the 2024 version of the EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-ISUP-SIOG guidelines on the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised PCa.
Methods: The panel performed a literature review of all new data published in English, covering the time frame between May 2020 and 2023.
Objective: The objective of this narrative review was to search the existing literature for studies reporting measures to minimize radiation use during endoscopic management of stone disease and present ways of reducing the exposure of both patients and operating room staff.
Methods: A literature review in PubMed was performed to identify studies describing protocols or measures to reduce radiation received during endourological procedures from January 1970 to August 2022. Eligible studies were those that reported outcomes for ureteroscopy or percutaneous nephrolithotripsy regarding measures to minimize radiation doses used intraoperatively, performed either in real-life theatres or using phantoms.
Context: The optimal management for men with prostate cancer (PCa) with unconventional histology (UH) is unknown. The outcome for these cancers might be worse than for conventional PCa and so different approaches may be needed.
Objective: To compare oncological outcomes for conventional and UH PCa in men with localized disease treated with curative intent.