Hsieh, Michael H.

Abstract Background 0.05% Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) is now commonly used as an antiseptic irrigation for inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) surgery. Limited in vitro data suggest compatibility of 0.05% CHG with antibiotic impregnated IPP devices; however, very little clinical research exists to guide use of 0.05% CHG in this population. Aim Assess the relationship of 0.05% CHG and antibiotic impregnated IPP infection in a large multi-institutional cohort. Methods We retrospectively reviewed a multi-institutional cohort of patients who underwent antibiotic impregnated IPP implantation. We identified cases using intraoperative 0.05% CHG and an equal number of consecutive control cases without 0.05% CHG use from each center for comparison. The primary outcome was IPP infection requiring explantation. Patient demographics and surgical variables were analyzed using chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression to identify variables associated with infection. Outcomes The primary outcome was IPP infection requiring device explanation. Results Among 14 participating institutions, 761 cases using an antibiotic impregnated IPP were analyzed. Of these, 348 (45.7%) had 0.05% CHG used during the case. Median follow-up was 4 months (interquartile range 1-12) for the 0.05% CHG group and 8 months (interquartile range 2-21) for the control group. Intraoperative 0.05% CHG utilization was not associated with antibiotic impregnated IPP infection rate (1.9% vs. 2.0%, P = .9). On multivariable analysis, prior IPP infection (OR 6.32, 95% CI 1.32-30.2, P = .021) and prior priapism (OR 10.01, 95% CI 1.18-89.7, P = .039) were associated with increased infection risk. Clinical implications The use of 0.05% CHG irrigation with antibiotic impregnated IPPs was associated with similar infection rates compared to antibiotic irrigation. Strengths and limitations Limitations include the use of a historical comparator cohort which may introduce unknown confounders, practice variation between multiple sites, shorter follow-up in the 0.05% CHG cohort, and the low incidence of IPP infection which may limit statistical power despite a large sample. The major strengths include the large, multi-institutional cohort, and the use of consecutive patients to minimize selection bias. Conclusion 0.05% CHG utilization was not associated with infection rates in antibiotic impregnated IPPs.

Abstract Introduction Microdenervation of the spermatic cord (MSCD) is an effective treatment modality for men with intractable scrotal content pain. For patients not interested in preserving fertility, some centers advocate ligation of the vas during denervation while others perfer stripping of the Vas deferens to preserve the vasal artery, hence preserving vasculature to testis and possibly decreasing post operative congestion pain. Objective This multicenter study analyzes outcomes of patients that underwent MSCD by either stripping or ligating the vas deferens Methods A retrospective chart review of 85 patients who underwent MSCD from 2020-2023 was performed. Patients’ demographics including history of prior surgical procedures was recorded. Response to surgery was evaluated as either complete resolution of pain, partial resolution of pain or no improvement in pain. Results 85 patients underwent MSCD with a median (IQR) age of 36 (25.5-46.5) years and median duration of pain of 16 months. 37 patients underwent stripping of vas while 48 underwent ligation of vas during MSCD. Median follow up was 12 months. 21(43.5%) patients had prior inguinal scrotal surgery in ligation group compared to 5 (13.5%) in the stripping group p=0.003. The etiology of pain was similar between the groups. The response to MSCD between the 2 groups was similar (p=0.968), with similar post op complications (Table 1). Conclusions In men with intractable chronic scrotal content with no interest in preserving fertility, ligation or stripping of the vas deferens yields similar outcomes with regards to pain resolution. Both techniques are safe with no reports of any testicular atrophy. Disclosure No.