Seven key opinion leaders share their recommendations of innovative studies to be presented during EAU18’s Plenary Sessions in a three-part series of articles. As part one of the series, Prof. M. Albersen (BE) and Prof. Morgan Rouprêt (FR) give a quick overview of Plenary Sessions 1 and 2 respectively.
Prof. M. Albersen (BE)
Plenary Session 1: Hot Topics, evidence quality and advances in Andrology
In recent years, deteriorating semen quality has been increasingly observed. Researchers have identified changing lifestyle choices, such as delayed fatherhood and increased anabolic steroid abuse, but also increased exposure to environmental gonadotoxins as potential important causes of this phenomenon. In this plenary, an overview of these issues will be given, and the urologist will be updated on surgical options for the management of male infertility problems.
In the second half of the session, the focus will be on emerging therapies in andrology, which are claimed to possess potential curative capacities, such as low intensity shockwaves and cellular therapies. The quality of evidence supporting these novel therapies will be discussed in a case-based fashion. Roupret
Prof. Morgan Rouprêt (FR)
Plenary Session 2: Nightmare sessions in bladder cancer care
Currently, the main methods of assessing surgical results for audit and quality assurance are mortality and morbidity. Although the incidence of postoperative complications is the most frequently used surrogate marker of quality in surgery, the direct cause–effect relationship between surgery and complications is often difficult to assess.
In daily practice, this is particularly true for BCa patients, who are likely to undergo several surgical procedures along the natural history of the disease. Their situation can become a “nightmare” and for the urologist as well in terms of surgical and medicolegal perspectives. Three distinct BCa cases will be discussed and examined by experts in the field during Plenary Session 2. A British lawyer Mr. Bertie Leigh, who specialises in medico-legal issues, will review the cases propose the course of action for urologists to undertake against “nightmare” cases.
Continue reading to Part 2.
Copenhagen photo courtesy of Thomas Høyrup Christensen