Severity of malcircumcisions and circumcision-related complications in three tertiary health facilities in Southern Nigeria

Background: Complications following circumcision are well recognized. In our environment, it is relatively common and frequently encountered in pediatric surgical practice. While some may be easily corrected others may be more tasking and even life threatening. There is need to identify the serious complications, and to proffer ways of preventing them or managing them when they occur. We aimed to evaluate the spectrum of malcircumcision and circumcision related complications in our region and to identify the major challenging ones.Patients and methods: Data was prospectively obtained from all male children presenting with malcircumcisions or circumcision related complications in three tertiary health facilities in southern Nigeria between June 2006 and May 2013. Data included complication presented, age, circumcisionist, method of circumcision, treatment offered, outcome.Results: A total of 126 male children with 143 malcircumcisions or complicated circumcisions were seen within the period. The spectrum ranged from minor glandular adhesions to penile amputation and lifethreatening excessive bleeding. Procedures Included: manual removal of plastibell, suture ligation of bleeding vessel, adhesiolysis, preputial trimming, meatoplasty, urethroplasty, fistuloplasty, glanuloplasty and penile repair. Most tasking were urethral loss, fistula closure and glanular amputation. There were no deaths.Conclusion: Circumcision related complications are common in our region. Penile amputation, urethral loss, and fistulae are the most challenging complications. There is need to educate the health workers and general public on the hazard of untrained circumcisionists.Keywords: circumcision, complications, severity, managemen

Assessment of community knowledge, attitude, and stigma of Buruli ulcer disease in Southern Nigeria

Background: Poor knowledge can influence timely care-seeking among persons with Buruli ulcer disease (BUD).Objectives: To assess community knowledge, attitude and stigma towards persons with BUD in endemic settings of Southern Nigeria.Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey conducted among adult community members in four States of Southern Nigeria. A semi-structured interviewer-administered questionnaire was administered to all participants.Results: Of 491 adults who completed the survey, 315 (64.2%) belonged to the ≤40 years age group, 257 (52.3%) were males and 415 (84.5%) had some formal education. The overall mean (SD) knowledge score was 5.5±2.3 (maximum 10). Only 172 (35.0%) of the participants had a good knowledge of BUD. A total of 327 (66.6%) considered BUD as a very serious illness. Also, there was a high-level of stigma against BUD patients; 372 (75.8%) of the participants felt compassion for and desire to help them, 77 (15.7%) felt compassion but tended to stay away from them, and 53 (10.8%) feared them because they may infect them with the disease. Having a formal education and ethnicity were independent predictors of good knowledge of BUD.Conclusion: There is poor community knowledge of BUD in endemic settings of Southern Nigeria which influenced the attitude and perceptions of community members towards persons with BUDKeywords: Mycobacterium ulcerans disease, knowledge, perceptions, practices

Screening diabetes mellitus patients for tuberculosis in Southern Nigeria: A pilot study

Introduction: Diabetes mellitus (DM) and tuberculosis (TB) are of great public health importance globally, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. Tuberculosis is the third cause of death among subjects with non-communicable diseases. DM increases risk of progressing from latent to active tuberculosis. The study aimed to ascertain yield of TB cases and the number needed to screen (NNS) among DM patients.Material and methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted at 10 health facilities with high DM patient load and readily accessible DOTS center in 6 states of southern region of Nigeria over a period of 6 months under routine programme conditions. All patients who gave consent were included in the study. Yield and NNS were calculated using an appropriate formula. Results: 3 457 patients were screened with a mean age (SD) of 59.9 (12.9) years. The majority were male, 2 277 (65.9%). Overall prevalence of TB was 0.8% (800 per 100 000). Sixteen (0.5%) were known TB cases (old cases). There were 221 presumptive cases (6.4%) out of which 184 (83.3%) were sent for Xpert MTB/Rif assay. Eleven (0.3%) new cases of TB were detected, giving additional yield of 40.7% and the number needed to screen (NNS) of 315. All the 11 patients were placed on anti-TB treatment. Conclusions: The prevalence of TB among DM patients was higher than in the general population. The yield was also good and comparable to other findings. This underscores the need for institute active screening for TB among DM patients. Further stu-dies are recommended to identify associated factors to guide policy makers in planning and development of TB-DM integrated services

Assessment of community knowledge, attitude, and stigma of Buruli ulcer disease in Southern Nigeria

Background: Poor knowledge can influence timely care-seeking among persons with Buruli ulcer disease (BUD). Objectives: To assess community knowledge, attitude and stigma towards persons with BUD in endemic settings of Southern Nigeria. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey conducted among adult community members in four States of Southern Nigeria. A semi-structured interviewer-administered questionnaire was administered to all participants. Results: Of 491 adults who completed the survey, 315 (64.2%) belonged to the 6440 years age group, 257 (52.3%) were males and 415 (84.5%) had some formal education. The overall mean (SD) knowledge score was 5.5\ub12.3 (maximum 10). Only 172 (35.0%) of the participants had a good knowledge of BUD. A total of 327 (66.6%) considered BUD as a very serious illness. Also, there was a high-level of stigma against BUD patients; 372 (75.8%) of the participants felt compassion for and desire to help them, 77 (15.7%) felt compassion but tended to stay away from them, and 53 (10.8%) feared them because they may infect them with the disease. Having a formal education and ethnicity were independent predictors of good knowledge of BUD. Conclusion: There is poor community knowledge of BUD in endemic settings of Southern Nigeria which influenced the attitude and perceptions of community members towards persons with BUD DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ahs.v19i2.34 Cite as: Nwafor CC, Meka A, Chukwu JN, Ekeke N, Alphonsus C, Mbah O, Madichie NO, Aduh U, Ogbeifo M, IseOluwa-Adelokiki BO, Edochie JE, Ushaka J, Ukwaja KN. Assessment of community knowledge, attitude, and stigma of Buruli ulcer disease in Southern Nigeria. Afri Health Sci.2019;19(2): 2100-2111. https://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ahs.v19i2.3

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Part I: Intermediate-/High-risk and Locally Advanced Disease, Biochemical Relapse, and Side Effects of Hormonal Treatment: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management. OBJECTIVE: To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members ("panellists") who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1-3. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. PATIENT SUMMARY: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer—metastatic and/or castration-resistant prostate cancer: report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) 2022

Background: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation together with novel treatment options have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. However, we still lack high-level evidence in many areas relevant to making management decisions in daily clinical practise. The 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) addressed some questions in these areas to supplement guidelines that mostly are based on level 1 evidence. Objective: To present the voting results of the APCCC 2022. Design, setting, and participants: The experts voted on controversial questions where high- level evidence is mostly lacking: locally advanced prostate cancer; biochemical recurrence after local treatment; metastatic hormone-sensitive, non-metastatic, and metastatic castration- resistant prostate cancer; oligometastatic prostate cancer; and managing side effects of hormonal therapy. A panel of 105 international prostate cancer experts voted on the consensus questions. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The panel voted on 198 pre-defined questions, which were developed by 117 voting and non-voting panel members prior to the conference following a modified Delphi process. A total of 116 questions on metastatic and/or castration- resistant prostate cancer are discussed in this manuscript. In 2022, the voting was done by a web-based survey because of COVID-19 restrictions. Results and limitations: The voting reflects the expert opinion of these panellists and did not incorporate a standard literature review or formal meta-analysis. The answer options for the consensus questions received varying degrees of support from panellists, as reflected in this article and the detailed voting results are reported in the supplementary material. We report here on topics in metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC), non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), and oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Conclusions: These voting results in four specific areas from a panel of experts in advanced prostate cancer can help clinicians and patients navigate controversial areas of management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting and can help research funders and policy makers identify information gaps and consider what areas to explore further. However, diagnostic and treatment decisions always have to be individualised based on patient characteristics, including the extent and location of disease, prior treatment(s), co-morbidities, patient preferences, and treatment recommendations and should also incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps where there is non-consensus and that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. Patient summary: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with healthcare providers worldwide. At each APCCC, an expert panel votes on pre-defined questions that target the most clinically relevant areas of advanced prostate cancer treatment for which there are gaps in knowledge. The results of the voting provide a practical guide to help clinicians discuss therapeutic options with patients and their relatives as part of shared and multidisciplinary decision-making. This report focuses on the advanced setting, covering metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and both non-metastatic and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Twitter summary: Report of the results of APCCC 2022 for the following topics: mHSPC, nmCRPC, mCRPC, and oligometastatic prostate cancer. Take-home message: At APCCC 2022, clinically important questions in the management of advanced prostate cancer management were identified and discussed, and experts voted on pre-defined consensus questions. The report of the results for metastatic and/or castration- resistant prostate cancer is summarised here

Management of Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer. Part I : Intermediate-/High-risk and Locally Advanced Disease, Biochemical Relapse, and Side Effects of Hormonal Treatment: Report of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference 2022

Background: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management. Objective: To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022. Design, setting, and participants: Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members (“panellists”) who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1–3. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. Results and limitations: The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis. Conclusions: These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. Patient summary: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions.publishedVersionPeer reviewe

Management of patients with advanced prostate cancer. Part I: intermediate-/high-risk and locally advanced disease, biochemical relapse, and side effects of hormonal treatment: report of the advanced prostate cancer consensus conference 2022

Background: Innovations in imaging and molecular characterisation and the evolution of new therapies have improved outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. Nonetheless, we continue to lack high-level evidence on a variety of clinical topics that greatly impact daily practice. To supplement evidence-based guidelines, the 2022 Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC 2022) surveyed experts about key dilemmas in clinical management. Objective: To present consensus voting results for select questions from APCCC 2022. Design, setting, and participants: Before the conference, a panel of 117 international prostate cancer experts used a modified Delphi process to develop 198 multiple-choice consensus questions on (1) intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, (2) biochemical recurrence after local treatment, (3) side effects from hormonal therapies, (4) metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, (5) nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, (6) metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and (7) oligometastatic and oligoprogressive prostate cancer. Before the conference, these questions were administered via a web-based survey to the 105 physician panel members (“panellists”) who directly engage in prostate cancer treatment decision-making. Herein, we present results for the 82 questions on topics 1–3. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement, with strong consensus defined as ≥90% agreement. Results and limitations: The voting results reveal varying degrees of consensus, as is discussed in this article and shown in the detailed results in the Supplementary material. The findings reflect the opinions of an international panel of experts and did not incorporate a formal literature review and meta-analysis. Conclusions: These voting results by a panel of international experts in advanced prostate cancer can help physicians and patients navigate controversial areas of clinical management for which high-level evidence is scant or conflicting. The findings can also help funders and policymakers prioritise areas for future research. Diagnostic and treatment decisions should always be individualised based on patient and cancer characteristics (disease extent and location, treatment history, comorbidities, and patient preferences) and should incorporate current and emerging clinical evidence, therapeutic guidelines, and logistic and economic factors. Enrolment in clinical trials is always strongly encouraged. Importantly, APCCC 2022 once again identified important gaps (areas of nonconsensus) that merit evaluation in specifically designed trials. Patient summary: The Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC) provides a forum to discuss and debate current diagnostic and treatment options for patients with advanced prostate cancer. The conference aims to share the knowledge of international experts in prostate cancer with health care providers and patients worldwide. At each APCCC, a panel of physician experts vote in response to multiple-choice questions about their clinical opinions and approaches to managing advanced prostate cancer. This report presents voting results for the subset of questions pertaining to intermediate- and high-risk and locally advanced prostate cancer, biochemical relapse after definitive treatment, advanced (next-generation) imaging, and management of side effects caused by hormonal therapies. The results provide a practical guide to help clinicians and patients discuss treatment options as part of shared multidisciplinary decision-making. The findings may be especially useful when there is little or no high-level evidence to guide treatment decisions

Trauma: a major cause of death among surgical inpatients of a Nigerian tertiary hospital

Introduction: Trauma presents a significant global health burden. Death resulting from trauma remains high in low income countries despite asteady decrease in developed countries. Analysis of the pattern of death will enable intervention to reduce these deaths from trauma in developingcountries. This study aims to present the pattern of trauma-related deaths in the surgical wards of University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital(UPTH).Methods: This was a retrospective study of all patients who died from trauma during admission into the surgical wards of UPTH from 2007 to 2012. Data on demography and traumatic events leading to death were collected from surgical wards, the emergency unit, and theatre records and analyzed using SPSS version 16.0. Results: Trauma accounted for 219 (42.4%) of the 527 mortalities  recorded. Most of the deaths (62.6 %) occurred between 20 and 59 years. There were 148 males (67.6 %). The yearly mortality rates were as  follows: 2007(12.3 %); 2008 (16.9%); 2009 (9.1%), 2010 (12.8 %), 2011 (23.3%) and 2012 (25.6%). Most of the patients (91.3%) died within 1 month of admission. The major events leading to deaths were burns  105(47.9%), traumatic brain injuries were 63(28.8%), and spinal cord injuries 21(9.6%). The secondary causes of death were mainly septic shock 112(51.1%); Respiratory failure 60(27.4%); and Multiple organ dysfunction 44(20.1%).Conclusion: Trauma is a leading cause of mortality in the surgical wards of our hospital. Trauma -related deaths continues to increase over theyears. Safe keeping of petroleum products and adherence to traffic rules will reduce these avoidable deaths.Key words: Trauma, mortality, surgical wards, Port Harcourt, Nigeri