AIM: The aim of this review is to analyze current data regarding options of treatment for men with hypogonadism and infertility.
MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: A comprehensive review of the current literature on management of infertility among hypogonadal men.
METHODS: A literature search using PubMed from 1980 to 2012 was done on articles published in the English language. The following medical subject heading terms were used: "infertility," "infertile," "hypogonadism;" "testosterone deficiency" and "men" or "male;" and "treatment" or "management."
RESULTS: The options for hypogonadal testicular failure are limited. Hormonal treatment is by and large ineffective. For secondary hypogonadism (hypogonadotropic/normogonadotropic hypogonadism), the options include gonadotropin-releasing hormone, human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG), follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), and anti-estrogens and aromatase inhibitors. Dopamine antagonist is indicated for prolactinoma. Artificial reproductive technique is indicated for primary testicular failure and also when medical therapy fails.
CONCLUSION: The most suitable option with the current data available is hCG with or without hMG/FSH. Testosterone supplementation should be avoided, but if they are already on it, it is still possible for a return of normal sperm production within 1 year after discontinuing testosterone. Ho CCK and Tan HM. Treatment of the hypogonadal infertile male-A review. Sex Med Rev 2013;1:42-49.
METHODS: The Asia Pacific Society of Sexual Medicine (APSSM) panel of experts reviewed contemporary evidence regarding penile reconstructive and prosthetic surgery with an emphasis on key issues relevant to the Asia-Pacific (AP) region and developed a consensus statement and set of clinical practice recommendations on behalf of the APSSM. The Medline and EMBASE databases were searched using the following terms: "penile prosthesis implant," "Peyronie's disease," "penile lengthening," "penile augmentation," "penile enlargement," "buried penis," "penile disorders," "penile trauma," "transgender," and "penile reconstruction" between January 2001 and June 2022. A modified Delphi method was undertaken, and the panel evaluated, agreed, and provided consensus statements on clinically relevant penile reconstructive and prosthetic surgery, namely (1) penile prosthesis implantation, (2) Peyronie's disease, (3) penile trauma, (4) gender-affirming (phalloplasty) surgery, and (5) penile esthetic (length and/or girth enlargement) surgery.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes were specific statements and clinical recommendations according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, and if clinical evidence is lacking, a consensus agreement is adopted. The panel provided statements on clinical aspects of surgical management in penile reconstructive and prosthetic surgery.
RESULTS: There is a variation in surgical algorithms in patients based on sociocultural characteristics and the availability of local resources. Performing preoperative counseling and obtaining adequate informed consent are paramount and should be conducted to discuss various treatment options, including the pros and cons of each surgical intervention. Patients should be provided with information regarding potential complications related to surgery, and strict adherence to safe surgical principles, preoperative optimization of medical comorbidities and stringent postoperative care are important to improve patient satisfaction rates. For complex patients, surgical intervention should ideally be referred and performed by expert high-volume surgeons to maximize clinical outcomes.
CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Due to the uneven distribution of surgical access and expertise across the AP region, development of relevant comprehensive surgical protocols and regular training programs is desirable.
STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This consensus statement covers comprehensive penile reconstructive and prosthetic surgery topics and is endorsed by the APSSM. The variations in surgical algorithms and lack of sufficient high-level evidence in these areas could be stated as a limitation.
CONCLUSION: This APSSM consensus statement provides clinical recommendations on the surgical management of various penile reconstructive and prosthetic surgeries. The APSSM advocates for surgeons in AP to individualize surgical options based on patient condition(s) and needs, surgeon expertise, and local resources.
METHODS: This was a prospective, cross-sectional study. A total of 429 respondents diagnosed with urologic cancers (prostate, bladder and renal cancer) from Sarawak General Hospital and Subang Jaya Medical Centre in Malaysia were interviewed by using a structured questionnaire. SPB and HRQoL were measured by the Self-perceived Burden Scale and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General 7 Item Scale respectively.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Self-perceived burden was experienced by 73.2% of the respondents. Respondents who had a lower education level, a monthly household income
METHODS: Six key sections were chosen: (1) high-risk localized and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) oligometastatic prostate cancer, (3) castration-naïve prostate cancer, (4) castrate resistant prostate cancer, (5) use of osteoclast-targeted therapy and (6) global access to prostate cancer drugs. There were 101 consensus questions, consisting of 91 questions from APCCC 2017 and 10 new questions from MyAPCCC 2018, selected and modified by the steering committee; of which, 23 questions were assessed in both ideal world and real-world settings. A panel of 22 experts, comprising of 11 urologists and 11 oncologists, voted on 101 predefined questions anonymously. Final voting results were compared with the APCCC 2017 outcomes.
RESULTS: Most voting results from the MyAPCCC 2018 were consistent with the APCCC 2017 outcomes. No consensus was achieved for controversial topics with little level I evidence, such as management of oligometastatic disease. No consensus was reached on using high-cost drugs in castration-naïve or castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer in real-world settings. All panellists recommended using generic drugs when available.
CONCLUSIONS: The MyAPCCC 2018 voting results reflect the management of advanced prostate cancer in a middle-income country in a real-world setting. These results may serve as a guide for local clinical practices and highlight the financial challenges in modern healthcare.