Park, Sung Hun

Abstract Introduction Vacuum erectile device (VED) is 1 of the main approved therapies for erectile dysfunction (ED). The introduction of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor (PDE5i) for ED significantly changed the roles of VED in contemporary sexual medicine. Objective To provide updated clinical evidence to inform health care providers on best practices with VED. Methods A consensus panel was held with leading sexual medicine experts during the 5th International Consultation on Sexual Medicine (ICSM). Relevant peer-reviewed literature was reviewed with focus on research from the last 10 years, but not limited to the last 10 years. The expert panel generated consensus statements based on the quality of evidence and criteria of Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Results As a primary or combination therapy for ED, VED has been shown to be successful in all populations studied, including difficult to treat cohorts, such as diabetes mellitus, spinal cord injury, and post-radical prostatectomy (RP), but long-term attrition rates are high. Available evidence has shown that VED can preserve or restore penile size for patients after RP, after incision and grafting surgery for Peyronie’s disease, before and after penile prosthesis, and after other post pelvic surgeries. However, it has not demonstrated a more rapid recovery of spontaneous erectile function after RP. VED does not increase penile length for subjective short penis. Studies with female specific VED for female sexual dysfunction are very limited. Conclusions Since the prior 4th ICSM, more evidence is available to support the new roles of VED in contemporary sexual medicine. Research into the penile pathophysiologic changes with VED therapy and clinical outcomes for various conditions are ongoing. We encourage sexual medicine clinicians to follow the 5th ICSM recommendations, but providers should also use their own judgement and adopt shared decision making with their patients/partners when considering VED for a specific disorder.

Abstract Background Variations in climate have been associated with a greater risk of surgical site infections, urinary tract infections, and changes in the skin microbiome; however, limited data exist on the impact of climate on inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) infections. Aim We sought to evaluate the impact of climate on the risk of IPP infections in a large international, multicenter cohort. Methods We performed a multi-institutional, retrospective study of patients undergoing IPP surgery. We then evaluated whether the month or season, during which surgery was performed, affected device infections. Implant infections were defined as infections requiring device explantation. A univariate logistic regression analysis was undertaken. Outcomes Our primary outcome was implant infection. Results A total of 5289 patients with a mean age of 62.2 ± 10.8 years received IPP placement. There was a fairly even distribution of implants performed in each season. A total of 103 (1.9%) infections were recorded. There were 32 (31.1%) IPP infections in patients who underwent surgery in the summer, followed by 28 (27.2%) in the winter, 26 (25.2%) in the spring, and 17 (16.5%) in the fall. No statistically significant differences were recorded in terms of season (P = .19) and month (P = .29). The mean daily temperature (P = .43), dew point (P = .43), and humidity (P = .92) at the time of IPP placement was not associated with infection. Clinical Implications These findings provide reassurance to prosthetic urologists that infection reduction strategies do not need to be tailored to local climate. Strengths and Limitations Climate data were not directly recorded for each hospital, but rather based on the monthly averages in the city where the surgery was performed. Conclusion The climate at time of IPP placement and time of year of surgery is not associated with IPP infection risk.

Abstract Background Modern-day penile prostheses use infection retardant coating to decrease rates of postoperative infection, subsequently reducing explantation and revision rates as well. The Coloplast Titan models are dipped into antimicrobial solutions right before implantation, and the components used for dipping can be tailored toward the patient. Aim To compare infection, explantation, and revision rates among different dipping solutions used before implantation for patients with diabetes receiving a Coloplast Titan implant. Methods We systematically reviewed 932 patients with diabetes receiving a primary penile implant across 18 different centers from the period April 2003 to August 2018. Of those patients, 473 received a Coloplast device, whereas 459 received an AMS device. Data regarding the type of antimicrobial solution used before implantation were recorded for 468 patients receiving a Coloplast Titan, including whether or not they suffered a postoperative infection and if they underwent explantation and/or revision. Outcome rates were compared using Fisher’s exact and Pearson’s chi-square tests, and logistic regression modeling was performed to account for covariates. Outcomes The main outcome measures of this study were postoperative infection, explantation, and revision rates. Results Of the total 932 patients reviewed, 33 suffered a postoperative infection. Of 468 patients receiving Coloplast implants, there was a 3.4% infection rate. The most commonly used antibiotic combination before dipping was vancomycin + gentamicin (59.0%). There was a significantly lower rate of postoperative infection, explantation, and revision when vancomycin + gentamicin was used than those associated with the use of all other dipping solutions ([1.4% vs 6.4%; P = .004], [1.1% vs 8.3%; P < .001], and [2.5% vs 12.5; P < .001], respectively). After adjusting for age, body mass index, preoperative blood glucose level, and hemoglobin A1c, the use of other dips was an independent predictor of postoperative infection (odds ratio: 0.191; P = .049). The inclusion of rifampin in the dipping solution trended toward being a significant risk factor for infection (P = .057). Including antifungals in the dipping solution did not affect infection (P = .414), explantation (P = .421), or revision (P = .328) rates. Clinical Implications Vancomycin + gentamicin was the most efficacious combination of antibiotics used for dipping in terms of preventing postoperative infection and subsequent explantation and revision. Strengths and Limitations Data were sampled across multiple institutions providing a large sample that may be more representative of the population of interest. A key limitation of the study was its retrospective nature, which prevented us from controlling certain variables. Conclusion The use of rifampin did not provide the same type of protection, possibly representing a shift in resistance patterns of common bacteria responsible for device infection.