-
European Journal of Cancer Prevention :... Nov 2016We systematically reviewed the literature on anal, penile, cervical, and oropharyngeal human papillomavirus (HPV) infection in Greece to provide a comprehensive overview... (Review)
Review
We systematically reviewed the literature on anal, penile, cervical, and oropharyngeal human papillomavirus (HPV) infection in Greece to provide a comprehensive overview of HPV prevalence and to explore the reporting of HPV in Greek men and women. A total of five databases, including PubMed and Scopus, were searched up until 1 January 2015 for studies looking at HPV prevalence, incidence, or risk factors by anatomical site. We identified 50 eligible studies for inclusion. The majority of them were cervical studies (n=26) followed by head and neck studies (n=13) with only two studies exclusively focusing on anal sites and two on penile sites. The remaining studies examined prevalence from multiple sites. Most studies looked at small, high-risk populations, and HPV prevalence ranged from 2.5-43.4% for cervical studies; 0-91% for head and neck studies; 54.6-78.4% for anal studies; and 20.3-66.7% for penile studies. Age, smoking, and number of sexual partners were the commonly assessed risk factors. There were significant sex and anatomic site disparities in the reporting of HPV prevalence. Given the relationship between HPV infection and the increasing incidence of anal cancer in men, more research is needed to reveal the prevalence of HPV at these sites in Greek men, especially given the reports of the declining health of the Greek population.
Topics: Anus Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Incidence; Male; Oropharyngeal Neoplasms; Papillomaviridae; Papillomavirus Infections; Penile Neoplasms; Risk Factors; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
PubMed: 26628088
DOI: 10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000207 -
PloS One 2014This meta-analysis was conducted to compare postoperative outcomes between transverse island flap (TVIF) onlay and tubularized incised-plate (TIP) urethroplasties for... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
This meta-analysis was conducted to compare postoperative outcomes between transverse island flap (TVIF) onlay and tubularized incised-plate (TIP) urethroplasties for primary proximal hypospadias.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A comprehensive literature search updated to 21st May 2014 was carried out for relevant studies. After literature identification and data extraction, odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidential interval (CI) was calculated to compare postoperative complication rate between TVIF onlay and TIP. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were applied to find potential affective factors.
RESULTS
A total of 6 studies including 309 patients receiving TVIF onlay and 262 individuals subjected to TIP met inclusion criteria. The synthetic data suggested that TVIF onlay and TIP were comparable in terms of total complication rate (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.56-1.30, p = 0.461), fistula (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.38-1.21, p = 0.194), recurrent curvature (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.43-3.12, p = 0.766), dehiscence (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.33-2.74, p = 0.920), diverticulum (OR 1.90, 95% CI 0.53-6.78, p = 0.321), meatal stenosis (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.20-2.77, p = 0.651) and urethral stricture (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.41-5.50, p = 0.545), without significant heterogeneity for each comparison group. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses revealed no significant findings. One-way sensitivity analysis indicated that the results were stable. No publication bias was detected using both funnel plot and Egger's test. Also, there were no obvious differences observed in cosmetic and functional outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis suggests that TVIF onlay and TIP urethroplasties are clinically equivalent. Given the inherent limitations of included studies, this conclusion should be interpreted with caution and wait to be confirmed by more well-designed randomized controlled trials with high quality in the future.
Topics: Humans; Hypospadias; Male; Surgical Flaps
PubMed: 25197970
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106917 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2014Until recently, phimosis has been treated surgically by circumcision or prepuceplasty; however, recent reports of non-invasive treatment using topical corticosteroids... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Until recently, phimosis has been treated surgically by circumcision or prepuceplasty; however, recent reports of non-invasive treatment using topical corticosteroids applied for four to eight weeks have been favourable. The efficacy and safety of topical corticosteroids for treating phimosis in boys has not been previously systematically reviewed.
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to 1) compare the effectiveness of the use of topical corticosteroid ointment applied to the distal stenotic portion of the prepuce in the resolution of phimosis in boys compared with the use of placebo or no treatment, and 2) determine the rate of partial resolution (improvement) of phimosis, rate of re-stenosis after initial resolution or improvement of phimosis, and the rate of adverse events of topical corticosteroid treatment in boys with phimosis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review. Date of last search: 16 June 2014.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared use of any topical corticosteroid ointment with placebo ointment or no treatment for boys with phimosis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed titles, abstracts and the full-text of eligible studies, extracted data relating to the review's primary and secondary outcomes, and assessed studies' risk of bias. Statistical analyses were performed using the random-effects model and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We contacted authors of primary articles asking for details of study design and specific outcome data.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 12 studies that enrolled 1395 boys in this review. We found that both types of corticosteroids investigated and treatment duration varied among studies.Compared with placebo, corticosteroids significantly increased complete or partial clinical resolution of phimosis (12 studies, 1395 participants: RR 2.45, 95% CI 1.84 to 3.26). Our analysis of studies that compared different types of corticosteroids found that these therapies also significantly increased complete clinical resolution of phimosis (8 studies, 858 participants: RR 3.42, 95% CI 2.08 to 5.62). Although nine studies (978 participants) reported that assessment of adverse effects were planned in the study design, these outcomes were not reported.Overall, we found that inadequate reporting made assessing risk of bias challenging in many of the included studies.Selection bias, performance and detection bias was unclear in the majority of the included studies: two studies had adequate sequence generation, none reported allocation concealment; two studies had adequate blinding of participants and personnel and one had high risk of bias; one study blinded outcome assessors. Attrition bias was low in 8/12 studies and reporting bias was unclear in 11 studies and high in one study.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Topical corticosteroids offer an effective alternative for treating phimosis in boys. Although sub optimal reporting among the included studies meant that the size of the effect remains uncertain, corticosteroids appear to be a safe, less invasive first-line treatment option before undertaking surgery to correct phimosis in boys.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Beclomethasone; Betamethasone; Clobetasol; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Hydrocortisone; Male; Mometasone Furoate; Ointments; Phimosis; Pregnadienediols; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Triamcinolone
PubMed: 25180668
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008973.pub2