Jimbo, M

ABSTRACT Introduction Vasectomy reversal (VR) is rarely covered by insurance, creating a market similar to cosmetic surgery with direct marketing to patients. While cost is an immediate concern for patients, surgeon training and experience are essential for a successful outcome. Patients considering VR are likely to seek information online regarding providers and the nature of the procedure. Objective In this study, we reviewed the characteristics of providers marketing VR online, as well as the comprehensiveness of their website content. Additionally, we sought to determine differences in VR practice patterns between academic and private practices. Methods We identified VR practices operating within the top 50 populous metropolitan areas in the USA. Practice websites were reviewed to obtain information such as educational background of providers, use of operating microscope, ability to perform vasoepididymostomy (VE), surgical volume, and out-of-pocket cost. Based on the information available from practice websites, providers were assigned a non-validated “REVERSAL score” out of 12, based on 8 domains (Risks disclosure; provider's Educational background; ability to perform VE; Expense disclosure; success Rate disclosure; Surgical volume disclosure; disclosure of Alternatives to VR; and Level of magnification used for VR) (Table). Descriptive statistics were used to compare the results between academic and private practices. Results 107 providers were identified (29 academic and 78 private). All but 2 were male, and similarly all but 2 had Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) degree. Review of practice websites allowed us to obtain complete information (REVERSAL score of 12) on only one provider (academic), with the majority (66%) of providers achieving REVERSAL score of ≤6. Providers with formal fellowship training in andrology, microsurgery, and/or infertility achieved higher REVERSAL scores compared to those without (6.9 ± 2.4 vs. 4.8 ± 2.4, p < 0.01). Academic providers were more likely to have completed pertinent fellowship training compared to private practice providers (97% vs. 44%, p < 0.05). Only 14% of academic providers disclosed procedure cost online, compared to 40% of private practice providers (p < 0.05). There was a trend toward increased use of online advertisements by private practice providers (22% vs. 10%, p = 0.07), and increased reference to literature success rates by academic providers (59% vs. 41%, p = 0.10). Among the 35 providers who disclosed pricing online, mean cost of VR was $5,990 ± 1,935. There was a non-significant trend toward increased cost with academic practices compared to private practices ($7,337 ± 1,103 vs. $5,765 ± 1,964, p = 0.09). There was significant reduction in cost when comparing non-urologists vs. urologists ($3,584 ± 1,554 vs. $6,591 ± 1,518, p < 0.01), and when comparing providers without pertinent fellowship training to those with ($5,405 ± 2,000 vs. $6,769 ± 1,590, p < 0.05). Conclusions There is significant lack of transparency in publicly available information from VR practices, both academic and private. Practices should implement measures to improve the dissemination of information to the general public, so that patients may more easily compare various providers. Disclosure Work supported by industry: no. A consultant, employee (part time or full time) or shareholder is among the authors (Coloplast, AMS).

ABSTRACT Introduction Peyronie's disease (PD) is a connective tissue disorder of the penile tunica albuginea, that can often cause penile deformity, pain, sexual dysfunction, and shortening. Therapies available include penile traction, oral medications, intralesional therapy, and surgical management. Many patients undergo multiple therapies for this disease due to poor satisfaction or lack of subjective improvement. Objective We thus sought out to delineate which patients were more likely to undergo a second therapy. Methods A cohort of 385 men who underwent therapy for Peyronie's disease from 2014-2018 were analyzed. A univariate analysis of patient demographics, subjective complaints, IIEF score parameters, primary treatments, and secondary treatment approaches was conducted. Results Of the 385 men identified, 29 patients ultimately decided to undergo a secondary treatment approach with 14 patients undergoing penile traction therapy, 7 intralesional therapy (Xiaflex) and 9 surgical therapy (5 penile plication, 2 insertion of inflatable penile prosthesis, and 2 grafting). 17 patients initially underwent surgery for PD with 23.53% of these patients undergoing a second line therapy (p<0.0469). 148 patients initially underwent Xiaflex injections with 12.16% of these patients undergoing a second line therapy (p<0.0227). Patients with poor orgasmic function as determined by IIEF questionnaire (median scores 8 vs 2, p<0.0420), men with greater objective curvature (median curvature 45 vs 35, p<0.0220), and men with greater stretched penile length (13.5 cm vs 12 cm, p=0.0284) were also more likely to undergo secondary therapy. Table 1 shows all factors associated with increased likelihood for secondary therapy. Conclusions Peyronie's disease is often a complex condition to treat due to the mental, emotional, and physical toll this disease takes on patients. It is helpful to determine which patients could likely require secondary therapy as this may help guide patient counseling and further management. Disclosure No