Sischka, Michael

Abstract Introduction Clostridium Collagenase Histolyticum (CCH) is the only-FDA approved non-surgical, intralesional option for men with Peyronie’s disease. However, little is known regarding practice patterns of CCH providers due to lack of standardized protocols. Objective To evaluate practice patterns for providers approved to administer CCH to treat Peyronie’s disease (PD), this study was conducted. Methods The “Find a Xiaflex-Trained Urologist” search tool on the Endo International patient-facing website was utilized to identify clinicians offering CCH injections in the United States. A 24-question survey was mailed to these providers with topics including provider type, years in practice, therapies offered, and patient evaluation was distributed to providers on patient-facing Endo International Xiaflex Find a Provider web-based tool. Results 63 responses were obtained, including 41% fellowship-trained urologists (FTU), 40% non-fellowship-trained urologists (NFTU), 14% advanced practice providers, and 5% un-specified. Prior to therapy, over 63% of providers performed in-office assessment of an erect penis while only 35% obtained ultrasound. 32% always and 36% never performed an artificial erection prior to administering CCH. Plaques were most identified by palpation or patient-provided direction with penile modeling and traction the most common adjuncts. When comparing NFTU to FTU, there was no difference in volume of PD patients with 60% examining fewer than 10 per month. FTU were more likely to offer traction (p = 0.002), plaque incision/excision and grafting (p = 0.005), increase time between injections (p = 0.012), and less likely to encourage penetrative intercourse between cycles (p = 0.016). The incidence of post-operative hematomas or suspected corporal rupture was not significantly different, although FTUs were more likely to conservatively manage rupture. Conclusions Variability exists in provider practice patterns surrounding CCH injections with most evaluating less than 10 patients with PD per month. This calls to attention the need for evaluation of techniques, patient outcomes, and standardization of care. Disclosure Yes, this is sponsored by industry/sponsor: Endo Pharmaceuticals. Clarification: Industry funding only - investigator initiated and executed study. Any of the authors act as a consultant, employee or shareholder of an industry for: Endo Pharmaceuticals.

OBJECTIVE Determine if a longitudinal point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) elective for medical students is effective in improving POCUS knowledge. METHODS We share the format of our longitudinal POCUS elective for medical students. To evaluate the efficacy of our longitudinal elective, we compare the difference between pre-elective and post-elective scores on a POCUS test using a paired t-test with threshold of statistical significance of p ≤ .05. We also share the results of a post-elective survey evaluating the effectiveness and quality of the longitudinal POCUS elective. RESULTS Pretest mean score was 56.3% (σ = 13.6), while posttest mean score was 73.3% (σ = 9.4), with an average score improvement of 17.0% (95% CI 9.9-24.0%, p < .0001). All students strongly or moderately agreed that they would recommend the elective to future medical students, that they were more confident with their POCUS skills after completing the elective, that the time commitment of the elective was appropriate, and that they felt they had the time to fit the elective into their schedule as a medical school student. Most students (56.7%) strongly or moderately agreed that the knowledge gained from the POCUS elective had helped them in their clinical rotations. CONCLUSIONS Our longitudinal POCUS curriculum subjectively and objectively improves medical students’ POCUS knowledge while remaining accessible to students. We share our unique longitudinal POCUS elective curriculum, the format of which and its benefits are transferable to other medical schools. Through this, we hope to provide others with ideas on how they may implement a longitudinal POCUS elective.

Abstract Introduction Intralesional Collagenase Clostridium Histolyticum (CCH; Xiaflex; Endo Pharmaceuticals, Dublin, Ireland) is the only FDA-approved intralesional therapy to treat bothersome penile curvature in men with Peyronie’s Disease (PD). Clinicians who administer CCH must be certified through a risk evaluation and management strategy (REMS) program. However, provider availability is highly dependent on geography and many patients must travel great distances to undergo evaluation and treatment with CCH by an experienced injector. Objective The goal of the current study is to describe the landscape of certified CCH injectors with respect to location and clinical background/training. Methods Patients are currently able to use an online “locate a specialist” tool through Endo Pharmaceuticals to identify clinicians in their local geographic area who are certified to administer CCH. Using this tool, a list of all providers who offer CCH injections was compiled throughout the continental United States. Pertinent information that was gathered included geographic location, type of provider or level of training [Medical Doctor (MD), Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (DO), Physician Assistant (PA), Nurse Practitioner (NP), and Registered Nurse (RN)], and gender of providers. This information was compared to state population data (United State Census Bureau) to determine per capita coverage. Results A total of 1947 Xiaflex providers were identified: 1749 Doctors of Medicine (MD; 90%), 115 Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (DO; 6%), 60 Physician Assistants (PA; 3%), 21 Nurse Practitioners (NP; 1%), and 1 Registered Nurse (RN; 0.05%). Out of the 1947 providers, only 95 (4.9%) were women. Most women administering Xiaflex were MDs (73%), followed by PAs (12%), NP and DOs (7%), and RN (1%). Xiaflex providers were available in all states except for Hawaii and Alaska. Providers were distributed throughout the United States with the average provider per capita ratio of 230,240. Wyoming, Washington D.C., Rhode Island, and Georgia had the best provider per capita at &lt;10,000 while New Mexico had the worst provider per capita ratio at 2,117,522. Conclusions Our results show significant variation in certified CCH injector availability for patients across the United States. &lt; 5% of all certified clinicians are female and 4% were advanced practice providers. Further work is needed to characterize and remedy gender disparities amongst providers, and ensure greater access for patients who desire an FDA-approved non-surgical treatment for their PD-associated curvature. Disclosure No

ABSTRACT Introduction Introduction:: Chronic scrotal content pain (CSCP) is generally defined by persistent and bothersome pain present for &gt; 3-months. This symptom complex leads to frustration for patients and providers alike, as the underlying etiology varies and in many instances is unknown. Scrotal pain may arise from outside the scrotal contents, as is seen with musculoskeletal conditions involving the hips, lower back, and pelvic musculature. Identifying those patients who have signs or symptoms of a musculoskeletal etiology earlier in their clinical course will allow for a more streamlined treatment pathway and minimize the need for unnecessary referrals. Objective To review historical and examination findings in patients presenting to a tertiary care center for evaluation of chronic testicular pain. Methods We reviewed our clinical experience with referrals for surgical intervention for “chronic testicular pain” at a tertiary care medical center between July 2019 and October 2020. Prior to scheduling an appointment, patients are queried via a list of questions to gather additional information in order to determine whether specialist consultation is indicated. Pertinent information was collected including historical patient data, physical examination findings, laboratory and imaging results, and treatment as recommended by the assessing physician. In addition, we gathered data on the number of prior consults and interventions performed by outside clinicians. The data was summarized to present a cross-sectional representation of patients presenting for CSCP. Results In total, 126 patients were seen for a primary chief complaint of CSCP. Mean patient age was 45 years [standard deviation (SD) 15]. 31 (24%), 55 (44%), and 40 (32%) were self-referred or referred by their primary care provider or a urologist, respectively. 88 patients (70%) had seen at least one prior urologist. 22/126 (17%) reported bilateral testicular pain. 29 patients (24%) had undergone a prior unsuccessful surgical intervention for their pain. On examination, reproducible testicular tenderness was present in only 57 patients (45%), despite 109 patients (87%) stating testicular pain as their primary chief complaint. Digital rectal examination of the pelvic floor musculature was positive for tenderness in 31/126 patients (25%), suggesting a possible pelvic floor contribution. After thorough assessment, musculoskeletal etiologies were suspected to underlie CSCP in 49 patients (39%), prompting additional evaluation and/or referrals. This included 35 patients (28%) who were specifically referred to a pelvic floor physical therapy specialist. Surgery was recommended in 68/126 patients (54%), including microdenervation of the spermatic cord in 22% (after successful diagnostic spermatic cord block), and epididymectomy in 13%. Conclusions CSCP presents with a wide array of concurrent symptoms. The history and physical examination must include assessments for concurrent abdominal, back, hip, and other genital/pelvic pain that may lend towards an alternative non-urologic treatment pathway. Disclosure No