(Background) The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) in men with chronic kidney disease and hypogonadism on conservative and hemodialysis treatment. (Methods) The studied population consisted of 38 men on hemodialysis (HD), 46 men with CKD stages II-IV (predialysis group, PreD) and 35 men without kidney disease who were similar in age to others (control group). Serum total testosterone level (TT) was measured, and free testosterone level (fT) was calculated. Hypogonadism criteria according to the EAU definition were fulfilled by 26 men on HD (68.4%) and by 24 men from the PreD group (52%). Testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) with testosterone enanthate in intramuscular injections every 3 weeks was applied in 15 men from HD and in 14 men from PreD. The safety of TRT was monitored by measuring PSA and overhydration. (Results) A significant rise of TT and fT was observed after 3 months of TRT, but no significant changes were observed after 6 and 12 months in the HD and PreD group. An intensity of clinical symptoms of hypogonadism measured by ADAM (androgen deficiency in the ageing male) questionnaire gradually decreased, and the intensity of erectile dysfunction measured by the IIEF-5 (international index of erectile functioning) questionnaire also decreased after 3, 6 and 12 months of TRT in the HD and PreD group. (Conclusions) The applied model of TRT is effective in the correction of clinical signs of hypogonadism without a significant risk of overhydration or PSA changes.

Background/Objectives: Radical prostatectomy is a standard treatment for localized prostate cancer. We aimed to compare perioperative outcomes and functional results between laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 120 patients who underwent LRP (n = 60) or RARP (n = 60). Perioperative parameters, including operative time, hospitalization duration, blood transfusion rate, wound healing complications, urinary catheterization duration, urinary tract infections (UTIs), and urinary incontinence, were assessed. Statistical analyses included Student’s t-, Mann–Whitney U, and χ² tests. Results: RARP was associated with significantly shorter operative time, compared with LRP (147.25 vs. 188.30 min, p < 0.0001). No significant differences were observed in hospitalization duration, transfusion rates, or overall complication rates. However, impaired wound healing was less frequent in the RARP group, with a 10% lower incidence, compared with the LRP group (p = 0.0946). Similarly, UTIs occurred less often in the RARP group (six vs. one cases; p = 0.0544). Urinary incontinence was significantly less frequent following RARP, with its incidence being more than twice as low, compared with the LRP group (p = 0.0032). Additionally, the RARP group had significantly lower International Prostate Symptom Scores, with a mean difference of 7.83 points, indicating improved urinary function. No significant differences were found in sexual function (IIEF-5 scores). Conclusions: RARP offers advantages over LRP, including reduced operative time, lower rates of wound healing complications, decreased incidence of urinary incontinence, and improved postoperative urinary function. Further studies with larger cohorts are warranted to confirm these findings and assess long-term functional and oncological outcomes.

Diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer in elderly men