Predictors of Patient Willingness to Consider Surgery Prior to Consultation at Sexual Health Clinic.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with patient willingness to consider surgical treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED) prior to urologic consultation. METHODS: A prospective database of patients presenting to the sexual health clinic at our institution was created from 2014 to 2018, consisting of previsit patient questionnaires and clinical information. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine factors associated with consideration of surgery and decision to undergo surgery. RESULTS: Of 1359 men presenting to the clinic, 991 men had a chief complaint of ED with 630 (63.6%) considering surgery. On multivariable analysis, factors significantly associated with previsit willingness for surgery included history of diabetes mellitus (P = .0009), increasing symptom bother (P <.0001), and decreasing relationship duration (P = .0005). Approximately 16% (162/991) patients considering surgery prior to consultation ultimately underwent penile implant insertion. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that older age (P = .003), history of diabetes mellitus (P = .03), lower international index of erectile function-EF domain (P = .0009) and history of intracavernosal injection therapy (P <.0001) were significantly associated with proceeding to ED surgery. Initial declaration of willingness to undergo ED surgery led to nearly 8-fold increased odds for surgery (P <.0001). CONCLUSION: Over 60% of patients presenting for ED consultation considered surgical intervention, of whom 25% underwent penile prosthesis. Both patient and relationship factors were predictors of surgical willingness. Previsit surgical willingness was associated with highest odds of eventual decision for surgery, suggesting that knowledge of ED treatment options in the general public may play a role. Our findings highlight opportunities for shared decision-making in a patient-centered model of care.

Regional Variation in Penile Prosthesis Utilization among Medicare Patients with Erectile Dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize penile prosthesis surgery utilization and assess for regional differences in the use of this procedure across the United States. MATERIALS & METHODS: We examined penile prosthesis surgeries (inflatable and semirigid implants) in Medicare beneficiaries with erectile dysfunction (ED) for the years 2006 through 2014. Adjusted utilization rates were calculated per 1000 beneficiaries accounting for age and race. Utilization rates were examined nationally and by hospital referral region (HRR). RESULTS: The national adjusted rate of penile prosthesis surgery declined from 5.41 per 1000 beneficiaries in 2006 to 3.74 per 1000 beneficiaries in 2014. The number of beneficiaries diagnosed with ED outpaced the number of patients undergoing surgery. Regional variation was observed; a 12-fold difference in 2014 (1.9/1000 in Norfolk, VA to 24.2/1000 in Miami, FL). Adjustment of 2014 data by urology provider density reduced variation between HRRs, and as a result a 3.5-fold difference was observed. Over 60% of HRRs performed 0 to <11 surgeries. CONCLUSION: The rate of penile prosthesis surgery is declining amongst Medicare beneficiaries with ED. Significant regional variation exists in the utilization of penile prosthesis surgery. This variation may be explained by a series of urologist and patient-specific factors, including provider density. Penile prosthesis surgery in Medicare beneficiaries is likely highly dependent on where these patients seek care.

Comparison of the patient's satisfaction underwent penile prosthesis; Malleable versus Ambicor: Single center experience.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the surgical results, complications, and satisfaction levels of patients who underwent malleable penile prosthesis implantation (M-PPI) and Ambicor penile prosthesis implantation (A-PPI). MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred forty two patients who underwent penile prosthesis implantation [M-PPI (Promedon- Tube®, Cordoba, Argentina): 81, and A-PPI (American Medical Systems, Minnesota, USA): 61] between 2013-2018 were evaluated retrospectively. Patients' age, body mass index, smoking history, etiological factors, modified "Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction (EDITS) Questionnaire" scores, shortening of the penis, and complications were recorded. RESULTS: The patients who performed A-PPI implantation were younger (56.27 ± 10.81 vs. 51.47 ± 11.79, p = 0.009). The EDITS scores of 31(38.2%) patients who underwent M-PPI and 44 (72.4%) patients who underwent A-PPI were available. It was observed that the scores on the following questions were statistical significantly higher in the A-PPI group: "Overall, are you satisfied with your penile prosthesis?, How much of your expectations did penile prosthesis meet?, How often do you use your penile prosthesis?" (p = 0.05, p = 0.048, p = 0.038). No difference was observed between the groups in terms of the scores on the other three questions (p = 0.447, p = 0.326, p = 0.365). A 61.3% of patients in MPPI (19/31) group, and 56.8% of patients in A-PPI (25/44) group stated penile shortening (p = 0.417). Mean shortening was reported as 2.1 ± 0.45 cm, and 2.12 ± 0.52 cm, in M-PPI and A-PPI groups, respectively (p = 0.90). CONCLUSION: It is remarkable that the patients who underwent A-PPI experienced higher satisfaction with their prosthesis. Even though it has not been evidenced in the current literature data, patients who have had either M-PPI or A-PPI should be informed about the risk of penile shortening.

[Is transition from pure laparoscopic to robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy associated with increase of surgical procedures for urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction?] / L'introduction de la chirurgie robot-assistée pour la prostatectomie totale s'accompagne-t-elle d'une modification du nombre d'interventions secondaires pour troubles fonctionnels génito-urinaires ?

OBJECTIVE: To study the impact of changing the technique of radical prostatectomy [pure laparoscopic radical (PR-Lap) to robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RP-Rob)] on the rate of secondary procedures for urinary incontinence (UI) and erectile dysfunction (ED). MATERIAL: Retrospective study evaluating the number and type of surgical procedures for post-RP UI and DE between 2008 and 2015, according to the technique of (RP-Lap or RP-Rob). RESULTS: Between 2008 et 2015, 2046 RP were performed in our department including 372 RP-Lap and 1674 RP-Rob. Among these patients, 84 (4%) had a surgical procedure for post-RP UI (18 AMS800, 9 balloons Pro-Act, and 57 male slings) and 15 (0.7%) had implantation of penile prosthesis for post-RP ED; 16 (0.7%) patients had both procedures. The mean delay between RP and UI surgery decrease from 3.2 years in 2008 to 1 year in 2015 and remain stable for penile prosthesis implantation (mean delay: 3.4 years). The overall rates of secondary procedures for UI and DE remained stable and below 5% and 1.7%, respectively, even during the transition period. For each year of PR studied, the rates of secondary procedure were higher in the RP-Lap group. CONCLUSION: Changing the technique of RP from RP-Lap to PR-Rob has a favorable impact on the rate of secondary procedures for UI and ED from the outset.

A Comparative Study Between 2 Different Grafts Used as Patches After Plaque Incision and Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Implantation for End-Stage Peyronie's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Although many grafts have been used for plaque incision with grafting (PIG) and penile prosthesis (PP) implantation, there is no evidence that favors 1 specific graft over another. AIM: To compare fibrin-coated collagen fleece (TachoSil; Baxter International, Deerfield, IL, USA) with porcine small intestinal submucosa (SIS; Cook Biotech, West Lafayette, IN, USA) as grafts. METHODS: From January 2007 to January 2015, 60 non-randomized consecutive patients affected by end-stage Peyronie disease underwent PIG and PP implantation (AMS 700CX; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA). All patients underwent preoperative penile dynamic duplex ultrasound. All procedures were performed by the same surgeon. Patients were divided in 2 different groups according to the graft used to cover the albuginea defect. SIS was used for grafting in 34 patients (group A) and TachoSil was used in 26 patients (group B). OUTCOMES: Overall hospital stay, operative time, 5-point Likert hematoma scale, visual analog scale, incidence of postoperative complications, and PP mechanical failure were selected as outcome measures. Functional outcomes were assessed through validated questionnaires (International Index of Erectile Function, Erectile Dysfunction Inventory of Treatment Satisfaction, and Sexual Encounter Profile questions 2 and 3) preoperatively and 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: The patients' median age was 63 years. No statistically significant differences were detected between groups for age and type and degree of curvature (median = 65°). Average follow-up was 35 months. No major intraoperative complications were reported. The average operative time was 145 minutes for group A and 120 minutes for group B. No statistically significant differences between groups were detected for postoperative complications. Only 3 patients developed a major postoperative complication requiring a 2nd surgical intervention: 1 patient in group A for mechanic failure and 1 patient in group A and 1 in group B for inflatable PP infection. Multivariate statistical analysis showed no significant difference for all variables analyzed between the 2 groups, except for operative time, which was significantly shorter for group B. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: TachoSil could represent a valuable option for grafting, considering its advantages in operative time and cost compared with SIS. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: Long-term follow-up represents a strength factor. Main limitations are the non-randomized nature of the study and the small number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: TachoSil seems to represent an effective solution for grafting after PIG and PP implantation. However, additional studies are warranted to confirm our results. Falcone M, Preto M, Ceruti C, et al. A Comparative Study Between 2 Different Grafts Used as Patches After Plaque Incision and Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Implantation for End-Stage Peyronie's Disease. J Sex Med 2018;15:848-852.

Experience With Prophylactic Gentamicin During Penile Prosthesis Surgery: A Retrospective Comparison of Two Different Doses.

BACKGROUND: Gentamicin has been determined to be active against a wide range of bacterial infections and has been commonly used as a preoperative antibiotic for inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) implantation. However, the best dosing regimen to produce the safest optimal prophylactic effect remains to be determined. AIM: To compare low- and high-dose gentamicin as prophylaxis during IPP implantation. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed two groups of patients who underwent IPP placement from April 14, 2012 through April 13, 2016. Group 1 was composed of 490 patients who underwent IPP placement from April 14, 2012 through April 13, 2014 and received a low dose of preoperative gentamicin at 80 mg every 8 hours for 1 day. Group 2 was composed of 407 patients who underwent IPP placement from April 14, 2014 through April 13, 2016 and received a single high dose of preoperative gentamicin at 5 mg/kg. We compared the infection rates of IPP and any gentamicin-related toxicities. The same surgeon performed all procedures. All patients received additional vancomycin 1 g before incision and at 12 hours postoperatively. OUTCOME: Demographic data and IPP infection rate were compared and potential toxicities from the higher dose of gentamicin were closely monitored. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in mean age, mean body mass index, and mean interval for IPP placement and IPP infection between the two groups. No toxicity was seen with the higher gentamicin dose. Six cases in group 1 (five de novo cases and one redo case, infection rate = 1.22%) and three cases in group 2 (two de novo cases and one redo case, infection rate = 0.74%) were found to have IPP infection. The infection rate in group 2 appeared to be lower than that in group 1, although a significant statistical difference was not achieved (P = .057). CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: These findings would help guide urologists in choosing an optimal preoperative gentamicin dose for IPP surgery. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This is the first study to report on the usage of high-dose preoperative gentamicin for IPP surgery but with limitations as a retrospective study. CONCLUSIONS: Although not achieving a statistical difference, there was a trend for patients receiving a higher dose of preoperative gentamicin to have a lower IPP infection rate. No toxicity was encountered from the 5-mg/kg gentamicin dose. We recommend following prophylactic high-dose gentamicin guidelines. Xie D, Gheiler V, Lopez I, et al. Experience With Prophylactic Gentamicin During Penile Prosthesis Surgery: A Retrospective Comparison of Two Different Doses. J Sex Med 2017;14:1160-1164.

The Evolution and Utility of the Small-Carrion Prosthesis, Its Impact, and Progression to the Modern-Day Malleable Penile Prosthesis.

INTRODUCTION: Erectile dysfunction has plagued humanity for millennia. For years, treatment had been in the hands of mental health professionals. It was not until the 1970s that urologists created a modality that was marketable, reproducible, and consistently successful at treating impotence, the Small-Carrion Penile Prosthesis. AIM: We present the evolution of the malleable/semi-rigid penile prosthesis, concentrating our efforts reviewing and critiquing the pivotal article published by Drs. Michael P. Small, Hernan M. Carrion, and Julian A. Gordon. We then discuss its continued advancement, current-day utilization, and the future of the malleable prosthesis. METHODS: From the early 1900s, surgeons have been toying with the idea of creating a penile implant. These initial attempts utilized rib cartilage, and eventually synthetic materials, including acrylic, silicone, and polyethylene. RESULTS: In 1975, Drs. Carrion and Small presented their initial experience of 31 patients utilizing their silicone implant. In their manuscript titled, "The Small-Carrion Penile Prosthesis: New Implant for the Management of Impotence," they discuss their technique, perioperative management of complications, and results. CONCLUSIONS: The malleable penile prosthesis continued to evolve throughout the years to the current day Genesis and Spectra. Although the current market is dominated by the inflatable penile prosthesis, there are specific situations where the malleable is ideally utilized. The pivotal article by Drs. Carrion and Small helped pave the way for the "New Era" of penile prosthetics and still remains one of the most impactful contributions to the management of erectile dysfunction.

The Mulcahy Salvage: Past and Present Innovations.

INTRODUCTION: Inflatable penile implants are a mainstay for the surgical correction of erectile dysfunction. For the last 40 years they have provided reliable outcomes with durable patient satisfaction. Infection of the implant continues to remain the primary surgical concern, despite the advent of antibiotic-coated devices and improved skin preparation solutions. METHODS: In this article, we review and evaluate the published literature for important contributions surrounding the various salvage techniques and washout strategies. In addition, the role of biofilm in prosthetic infection will be discussed. RESULTS: First described by Mulcahy for instances of device infection, the salvage or rescue procedure was established to avoid complete removal and staged replacement. This approach, with its avoidance of difficult revision surgery, penile shortening and patient discomfort, has produced success as high as 84%. CONCLUSION: Mulcahy's innovative approach at salvage or rescue reimplantation has proven to be a highly successful approach to this difficult surgical problem. Without question, the report of the long-term results of his salvage patients has directly influenced a generation of prosthetic surgeons.

Penile Prosthesis First and Replacement Surgeries: Analysis of Patient and Partner Satisfaction.

INTRODUCTION: Among the many treatments for erectile dysfunction, implantation of a penile prosthesis has been associated with high patient satisfaction rates. Prosthesis replacement has become an accepted procedure in the event of device malfunction or complications, but to our knowledge, there are no data regarding the impact of implant replacement on patients and partner satisfaction. AIM: The aim of our study was to assess and to compare the level of satisfaction, with a first or second penile prosthesis implantation (PPI), in men with refractory erectile dysfunction and their partners. METHODS: A survey study based on a five-item questionnaire was carried out at our center between January 1999 and January 2012. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure used was the level of patient and partner satisfaction with sexual intercourse after PPI. RESULTS: Of the 190 eligible patients, 149 (78%) completed the survey (110 underwent a first implant and 39 a reimplant). Seventy-nine percent of first-time implanted patients and 80% of the reimplanted patients (P > 0.05; not significant [ns]) reported satisfactory sexual intercourse (very or moderately satisfied), while 74% and 80% of their partners reported satisfactory intercourses, respectively (P > 0.05; ns). Overall, 73.7% of first implants and 70% of second implants reported that they would undergo the procedure again if the PPI failed (P > 0.05; ns). With regards to cosmetic aspects, 13% of the first implants' and 15% of second implants' partners reported either penile shortness or soft glans as the main causes of their dissatisfaction. Only 2.4% of first implants and 1% of reimplanted patients expressed difficulty in manipulating the device. CONCLUSIONS: PPI is successful in returning the ability for satisfactory sexual intercourse to both first implant and reimplanted patients and their respective partners.

Trends in the Utilization of Penile Prostheses in the Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The utilization of penile prosthesis (PP) insertion in the general population for medically refractory erectile dysfunction (ED) has not been well-characterized. This study assessed the national temporal trends in the surgical management of ED utilizing PP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An analysis of the 5% Medicare Public Use Files from 2001 to 2010 was performed to assess the use of PP. Regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with PP placement, type of PP utilized, and factors associated with revisions. RESULTS: A total of 1,763,260 men were diagnosed with ED, 3% (53,180) of whom underwent PP insertion. The utilization of PP for ED decreased from 4.6% in 2002 to 2.3% in 2010 (P < 0.01). This temporal decline in utilization was significant across all demographic factors including age, ethnicity, and geographic location. Men aged 65-74, from the U.S. South and West, and those with Charlson comorbidity scores >1 were more likely to have a PP inserted for ED (P < 0.01). African American men were more likely to have a semirigid PP placed compared with a multicomponent inflatable PP, and were more likely to undergo a revision or removal of the PP compared with Caucasian men (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The surgical management of ED with PP changed significantly between 2001 and 2010. The overall utilization of PP decreased, but its use in patients with significant medical comorbidities increased. Age >65, ethnicity, and geography influenced the likelihood of PP placement, prosthesis type, as well as the likelihood of prosthesis removal or revision.

Hospital-based trends in penile prosthetic surgery.

INTRODUCTION: We examined national and regional trends in hospital-based penile prosthetic surgery and identified patient-specific factors predicting receipt of inflatable vs. semi-rigid penile prostheses. AIMS: To improve our understanding of the surgical treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED). METHODS: We utilized the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 1998 to 2010 in the United States and the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) database from 1995 to 2010. Total number of penile implants performed and proportions of inflatable vs. semi-rigid prosthesis were examined. Multivariate analysis (MVA) was performed to identify factors associated with selection of inflatable vs. semi-rigid prostheses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure is the total number of hospital-based penile prosthetic surgeries performed in the United States over a 12-year period (1998-2010). Secondary outcome measures include proportion of inflatable and semi-rigid prosthesis implantations and factors influencing receipt of different prostheses. RESULTS: We identified 53,967 penile prosthetic surgeries in the NIS; annual number implanted decreased from 4,703 to 2,338. Inflatable prostheses incurred higher costs but had a similar length of stay (LOS). In MVA, Caucasian race, Peyronie's disease, and private insurance were independently associated with receipt of an inflatable prosthesis. We identified 7,054 penile prostheses in OSHPD; annual number implanted decreased from 760 to 318. The proportion of inflatable prostheses increased significantly from 78.4% to 88.4% between 2001 and 2010. Inflatable prostheses incurred higher costs but had similar median LOS. In MVA, Caucasians and men without spinal cord injury were more likely to receive inflatable prosthesis. CONCLUSION: Hospital-based penile prosthetic surgery has decreased substantially both nationwide and in California. In the United States, Caucasian race, Peyronie's disease, and private insurance were independently associated with receipt of an inflatable penile prosthesis. California population data correlated with national trends and can be utilized to further study surgical management of ED.

Prediction model for penile prosthesis implantation for erectile dysfunction management.

OBJECTIVE: Penile prosthesis surgery is indicated based on undesirability, contraindication or ineffectiveness of non-surgical options for erectile dysfunction. This definitive treatment is often delayed after initial diagnosis. Our objective was to develop a prediction tool based on a patient's clinical history to determine likelihood of ultimately receiving a penile prosthesis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective analysis used claims data from Commercial and Medicare supplemental databases. Inclusion criteria were 18 years of age with 1 year of continuous enrollment at the first diagnosis of erectile dysfunction. Patients' demographics, co-morbidities and erectile dysfunction therapy were derived based on enrollment, medical and prescription histories. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Cox proportional hazards model with stepwise selection was used to identify and quantify (using relative risk) factors associated with a future penile prosthesis implant. Co-morbidities and therapies present prior to the index erectile dysfunction diagnosis were analyzed as fixed covariates. RESULTS: Approximately 1% of the dataset's population (N = 310,303 Commercial, N = 74,315 Medicare, respectively) underwent penile prosthesis implantation during the study period (3928 patients in the overall population: 2405 patients [0.78%] in the Commercial and 1523 patients [2.05%] in the Medicare population). Factors with the greatest predictive strength of penile prosthesis implantation included prostate cancer diagnosis (relative risk: 3.93, 2.29; 95% CI, 3.57-4.34, 2.03-2.6), diabetes mellitus (2.31, 1.23; 2.12-2.52, 1.1-1.37) and previous treatment with first-line therapy (1.39, 1.33; 1.28-1.5, 1.2-1.47) (all P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The presence and extent of specific medical history factors at the time of erectile dysfunction diagnosis predict an individual's future likelihood of penile prosthesis. Calculating the likelihood of penile prosthesis implantation based on the weight of these factors may assist clinicians with the definition of a care plan and patient counseling. The precision of the model may be limited by factors beyond medical history information that possibly influence the decision to proceed to surgery.

Modern utilization of penile prosthesis surgery: a national claim registry analysis.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the modern utilization of penile prosthesis surgery based on data derived from national claim databases and contrast to an analysis of patients similarly treated at an academic center during a contemporaneous period. A retrospective claim analysis utilizing a national database (MarketScan, Thomson Reuters) was performed for Commercial insurer and Medicare databases between January 2000 and March 2011. A retrospective analysis of contemporaneous penile prosthesis implantation at the Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHH) was done. Population demographics, comorbidities, previous (ED) therapies and time from ED diagnosis to surgery were assessed. Median ages for patients undergoing penile prosthesis implantation were 58, 70 and 63 years for the Commercial, Medicare and JHH cohorts, respectively. For the claim databases (Commercial, Medicare, respectively), hypertension (72%, 78%), dyslipidemia (71%, 56%) and diabetes mellitus (45%, 40%) were predominant comorbidities, whereas for the JHH database prostate cancer (51%) and its management by prostatectomy (45%) or radiation (12%) were predominant. Previous use of PDE5 inhibitors was similar across databases (60, 58 and 69% for Commercial, Medicare and JHH cohorts, respectively), although previous use of non-oral ED therapies was greater in the JHH database. Median time to surgery from initial ED diagnosis was 2, 2 and 4 years for the Commercial, Medicare and JHH patients, respectively. Demographic variables and ED risk factors associated with penile prosthesis surgery at a national population-based level over a contemporary period were defined. Some differences in utilization trends of penile prosthesis surgery exist at a single institutional level.

Data on the utilization of treatment modalities for ED in Taiwan in the era of PDE5 inhibitors.

Oral PDE5 inhibitors, intracavernosal injection and penile implants are mainstay treatments for ED. Data on their utilization reflect economic aspects of ED, but are underreported. We report utilization data and user characteristics for these modalities in Taiwan between 1999 and 2011. Sales data on PDE5 inhibitors-sildenafil citrate, tadalafil and vardenafil and on alprostadil were retrieved from International Market Services Health, and on penile implants from the local importing company for them. Users' clinical characteristics were derived from one institution. Between 1999 and 2011, sales of PDE5 inhibitors increased 5.9-fold, whereas those of alprostadil and penile implants remained stable. Over 90% of PDE5 inhibitors were purchased in pharmacies without a prescription. Between 1999 and 2011, the number of patients who received PDE5 inhibitors (n=4715) exceeded those who underwent penile injection (n=333) and penile implantation (n=108). The mean age of patients with ED who first received PDE5 inhibitors tended to decrease over consecutive years. Discontinuation of treatment with PDE5 inhibitors or intracavernosal injection reached 90% within 3 years of treatment initiation. Our data on the increasing market for PDE5 inhibitors and the trend for first use of PDE5 inhibitors at younger ages highlight the growing burden of ED and the acceptance of PDE5 inhibitors as the primary treatment for ED.

[Inflatable penile prosthesis: satisfaction rate, result, prognostic factors. Prospective study on 50 primooperated patients in CHU of Nice between 2000 and 2009]. / Implants péniens hydrauliques: enquête de satisfaction, résultats et complications. Étude rétrospective portant sur 50 patients consécutifs primo implantés au CHU de Nice entre 2000 et 2009.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate satisfaction rates and results in patients with penile prosthesis (5 PP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2000 till 2009, 50 patients with organic erectile dysfunction (ED) were implanted with hydraulics penile prosthesis by the same surgeon. Medical records were collected retrospectively. We analysed demographic characteristics, type of prosthesis used, per- and postoperative complications, prosthesis explantations and satisfaction rate measured by EDITS modified. RESULTS: Mean age of patients was 60.2 ± 8.46 years (35-75). Thirty implanted patients (60%) were diabetics. We used a peno-scrotal incision in all patients. Three types of prosthesis were used; AMS Ambicor, AMS 700, Titan OTR. A bi-compartment and three-compartment prosthesis were implanted respectively in 24 and 26 patients. The prosthesis was retrieved in two patients secondary to a mechanical failure, in three patients for prosthesis erosion, in two patients for prosthesis infection. In four out of the seven explanted patients, a second prosthesis was implanted. The EDITS questionnary was realized by telephonic interview in 47 patients after a mean follow-up of 45 months (5-114). The response rate was of 83%. The satisfaction rate was of 81%. CONCLUSION: In our series, the satisfaction rate was better for the three-compartment prosthesis. After 45 months of follow-up, 73% (31/42) of patients had a functional prosthesis. The non-satisfaction most frequently found were patients who have complications as sepsis; mechanical failure, and prosthesis erosion, and subjective feeling of penile length reduction.

[Rehabilitation of erectile function after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: therapeutic concepts in Germany]. / Rehabilitation der erektilen Funktion nach nervenschonender radikaler Prostatektomie : Therapiekonzepte in Deutschland.

OBJECTIVE: Despite objective published data regarding rehabilitation of erectile function (EF) after nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (nsRP) the gold-standard treatment is still under debate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the distribution of the different treatment options in Germany. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between October 2010 and May 2012 a questionnaire was sent to urologists in outpatient, general and university hospitals and rehabilitation hospitals in Germany. The survey consisted of various questions concerning, e.g. if and what kind of therapy urologists choose to support rehabilitation of EF after nsRP. Further questions dealt with the frequency, duration and optimal start of the chosen therapy. RESULTS: Currently 188 urologists have completed and returned the questionnaire. The distribution was urologists in hospitals n=79 and outpatient/ambulatory n=106, with 24 % performing surgical treatment and urologists in rehabilitation hospitals n=3. The question about the rehabilitation concept showed 39 different forms of treatment within this group. To increase EF after nsRP PDE5 inhibitors were mostly administered (88 %) with 45 % on request compared to 55 %on a daily or regular basis ≥ 3 times/week. The use of penile injection therapy, medicated urethral system for erection (MUSE) and vacuum constriction devices (VCD) was prescribed by 32 %, 6 % and 30 % of urologists, respectively. Only 14 % of the urologists did not choose any active kind of rehabilitation treatment for EF recovery after nsRP. CONCLUSION: Many different therapeutic concepts are currently performed in Germany to increase EF recovery after nsRP. The use of PDE5 inhibitors is the most commonly chosen treatment option. Despite published data regarding effectiveness, the optimal treatment seems to be still unknown.

Penile implants among prisoners-a cause for concern?

BACKGROUND: We report the prevalence of penile implants among prisoners and determine the independent predictors for having penile implants. Questions on penile implants were included in the Sexual Health and Attitudes of Australian Prisoners (SHAAP) survey following concerns raised by prison health staff that increasing numbers of prisoners reported having penile implants while in prison. METHODS: Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) of a random sample of prisoners was carried out in 41 prisons in New South Wales and Queensland (Australia). Men were asked, "Have you ever inserted or implanted an object under the skin of your penis?" If they responded Yes: "Have you ever done so while you were in prison?" Univariate logistic regression and logistic regression were used to determine the factors associated with penile implants. RESULTS: A total of 2,018 male prisoners were surveyed, aged between 18 and 65 years, and 118 (5.8%) reported that they had inserted or implanted an object under the skin of their penis. Of these men, 87 (73%) had this done while they were in prison. In the multivariate analysis, a younger age, birth in an Asian country, and prior incarceration were all significantly associated with penile implants (p<0.001). Men with penile implants were also more likely to report being paid for sex (p<0.001), to have had body piercings (p<0.001) or tattoos in prison (p<0.001), and to have taken non-prescription drugs while in prison (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Penile implants appear to be fairly common among prisoners and are associated with risky sexual and drug use practices. As most of these penile implants are inserted in prison, these men are at risk of blood borne viruses and wound infection. Harm reduction and infection control strategies need to be developed to address this potential risk.

Long-term revision rate due to infection in hydrophilic-coated inflatable penile prostheses: 11-year follow-up.

INTRODUCTION: Penile implant surgery continues to be an important option for men with erectile dysfunction. Advancements in technology of implants have contributed to improved survival from mechanical breakdown. Prosthesis infection remains a serious adverse event. For the last 8 years, the Titan implant (Coloplast Corporation, Minneapolis, MN, USA) has been available with an infection-retardant polyvinylpyrrolidone coating. AIM: To compare the infection rates between coated three-piece inflatable penile prostheses (IPPs) with the previous non-coated model. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Infection-related revisions reported in the physician-generated, manufacturer-tabulated patient information forms (PIFs). METHODS: PIFs reported into the voluntary, post-market registry of Coloplast Corporation from July 14, 2000 to September 30, 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. Infection-related revisions entered into the product evaluation database for coated and non-coated IPPs were compared. Data were analyzed using Pearson's chi-squared test. RESULTS: The database included 36,391 PIFs related to primary IPP implantation. At 11 years of follow-up, 4.6% (7,031) of non-coated IPPs were removed or replaced due to infections, whereas 1.4% (29,360) of hydrophilic-coated implants reported replacements due to device infections. The hydrophilic coating of the IPP components makes the device slippery and prevents bacterial attachment. The hydrophilic coating allows rapid absorption of antibiotics in an aqueous solution and allows these water-soluble antibiotics to elute off the device into the implant spaces. Unfortunately, information pertaining to what agents were used in the studies patients was not tabulated. The rate of revision due to device infection was reduced 69.56% in patients with hydrophilic-coated IPPs (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the longest post-marketing registry report related to IPP infections. At 8 years of follow-up, the hydrophilic-coated IPPs demonstrated a significant reduction in revision rates due to infection when compared with the 11-year follow-up of non-coated implants. Since there was no information or uniformity of antibiotics used in the soaking solution, it is uncertain which antibiotic selection provided the best results. In vitro testing against known infectious agents may further benefit IPP patients by reducing the prosthesis infection rate.

Penile implant utilization following treatment for prostate cancer: analysis of the SEER-Medicare database.

INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer treatments, including radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiotherapy (RT), may adversely affect erectile function. Penile implant surgery is a well-recognized erectile dysfunction (ED) treatment for prostate cancer survivors who wish to remain sexually active and in whom nonsurgical treatments are ineffective or unpalatable. AIM: To describe the utilization of penile implants after RP or RT for prostate cancer and to identify predictors of such use. METHODS: From Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results cancer registry data linked with Medicare claims, we identified men aged ≥66 years diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1998-2005 who were treated with RP or RT. Utilization of penile implants was identified in Medicare claims. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify demographic and clinical predictors of implant utilization. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Medicare claim for penile implant surgery, impact of demographic and clinical factors on penile implant surgery utilization. RESULTS: The study group comprised 68,558 subjects, including 52,747 who had RT and 15,811 who had RP as primary prostate cancer treatment. The penile implant utilization rate was 0.8% for the entire group, 0.3% for the RT group, and 2.3% for the RP group. Predictors of penile implant utilization were initial treatment modality, younger age, and African American or Hispanic race, being unmarried and residing in the South or West. CONCLUSIONS: Penile implant utilization after prostate cancer treatment is relatively uncommon in men over 65. Men who are younger, African American or Hispanic, and those who have an RP are more likely than their peers to receive a penile implant after prostate cancer treatment.