Bernstein, Ari

Abstract Introduction The Penuma ® implant is a medical-grade silicone implant used in the cosmetic augmentation of the penis. Reportedly 3-11% of devices are being removed over time for reasons such as infection, pain, and dissatisfaction with the device. Objective Despite this, there remains a paucity of information demonstrating safe removal of this device. In this video, we outline intra-operative considerations to promote the safe removal of the Penuma device. Methods Sharp and blunt dissection to the level of the capsule is performed via the original incision line. The proximal end of the device is identified via sharp dissection through the capsule. The penis is then everted to expose the distal attachments of the implant, which are subsequently dissected. Superficial and sharp dissection to remove the mesh is performed. We avoid the use of cautery to prevent damage to the nearby neurovascular bundle. Once the mesh and all permanent material is removed, haemostasias is achieved. A drain may be placed. The incision is irrigated and closed in a multi-layer fashion. Results Here we demonstrate a safe and feasible method to surgically remove the Penuma (Himplant) device. Conclusions In conclusion, the Penuma ® implant is a medical-grade silicone implant used in the cosmetic augmentation of the penis that can be safely removed surgically in the event of infection, pain, or dissatisfaction with the device. Disclosure No

Abstract Introduction Traditional vasectomy reversals are performed in the operating room under general anesthesia, which poses logistical, financial, and clinical drawbacks. A shift toward office-based vasectomy reversal under local anesthesia may address these limitations. Objective To demonstrate the feasibility and technical approach of performing microsurgical vasovasostomy in an office-based setting using local anesthesia, without compromising patient comfort or surgical technique. Methods In this video we outline a step-by-step microsurgical vasovasostomy in an office-based setting. Results Office-based vasovasostomy is technically feasible in the office-based setting. Conclusions Office-based microsurgical vasovasostomy is safe, feasible, and well tolerated in the office-based setting, offering multiple patient- and provider-centered advantages. Disclosure No

Abstract Introduction Glans ischemia and subsequent necrosis is a rare but devastating complication of inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) placement. Differentiating true glans ischemia from severe ecchymosis is often difficult to distinguish, yet it remains paramount given the glans ischemia principle: “when in doubt, take it out.” Objective We present several clinical scenarios and associated postoperative images wherein there was concern for post-IPP glans ischemia based on initial clinical examination. In addition, we review pertinent clinical factors that can be used to help distinguish between greater than “average” glans ecchymosis and true ischemia. Methods We present four cases from 2025 and describe clinical factors likely responsible for increased glans discoloration. Results Traditional risk factors for glans ischemia are constrictive IPP wrap, vasculopathy, use of prolonged large bore catheters, and concomitant surgery (circumcision, distal counter-incision, urethral/neurovascular bundle mobilization). Case 1 was a patient with a history of radiation for prostate malignancy who had notably hypervascular corpora intraoperatively. On postoperative day (POD) #1, the urethral meatus was ecchymotic along with patchy ecchymosis throughout the glans. The Kerlix wrap can be seen around the penile shaft up to the corona. Removing the constrictive wrap and increasing room lighting revealed a well-vascularized glans with spotty ecchymosis likely from passage of the Keith needles during deployment. Case 2 was another patient examined on POD1 after uneventful IPP placement under local anesthesia. Note the similar level of ecchymosis involving the scrotum. Case 3 is another patient examined POD1 from a penoscrotal IPP that required multiple firing attempts with the Keith needle. Again, multifocal areas of patchy ecchymosis are interspersed with areas of normal appearing glans. The patient’s skin color was also similar in appearance to the areas of ecchymosis, requiring careful attention to detail to differentiate. Finally, Case 4 is an image on POD0 after uneventful IPP. The patient required several Keith needle passes because Furlow tool severed suture. Notably, decision was made to leave the penile implant in place in all cases. The penile wrap and/or catheter was removed and lighting was optimized to evaluate for clinical change. No patient reported paresthesia or pain out of proportion to the clinical examination. All glans were warm to the touch. Rates of glans bruising at POD3 for 298 implants performed since 2024 under local anesthesia, with bruising scored 0-4, were as follows: 0: 3.7% 1: 48.7%, 2: 25.5% 3: 21.1% 4: 0.3%. This demonstrates high rates of glans bruising with local anesthesia. We speculate that the increased rate of glans bruising may be attributed to the aggressive nature of the local anesthesia block, which can result in vasodilation and ecchymosis due to needle trauma and increased vascular permeability. Conclusions IPP cylinder deployment requiring multiple Keith needle punctures, constrictive post-op penile wrap, hypervascular corpora, exam/images with poor lighting, extensive bruising in other areas, and IPPs performed under local anesthesia appear may contribute to glans discoloration that mimics ischemia. A detailed physical exam and close clinical monitoring are essential when postoperative glans discoloration is observed. Disclosure No

Abstract Introduction Penile fracture is traditionally considered a surgical emergency warranting immediate repair with the goal to maximize long-term erectile function and minimize penile curvature. Nonetheless, consensus on the optimal timing for penile fracture repair remains to be elucidated and is the subject of continued research efforts. Objectives This review aims to summarize the contemporary literature pertaining to optimal timing of penile fracture repair and associated outcomes. Methods We queried PubMed/MEDLINE and Google Scholar for relevant articles published between 2012 and 2022 to evaluate the most recent literature on the queried topic of early vs delayed intervention for penile fracture. All examined review articles were published within the last decade but may have included analyses of studies published prior to 2012. Reference lists of articles and reviews were manually reviewed to identify additional relevant articles. Results We identified 16 articles that met inclusion criteria: 12 primary articles and 4 systematic reviews or meta-analyses. Importantly, definitions of early and delayed intervention varied greatly among studies, making quantitative comparison challenging. In summary, 6 primary studies and 2 systematic review articles favored early intervention. There were also 6 primary studies and 2 systematic review articles suggesting equivocal outcomes between early and delayed repair. No articles demonstrated improved outcomes with delayed repair relative to early intervention. Conclusion Surgical intervention for penile fracture remains the gold standard, with superior long-term sexual and functional outcomes when compared with conservative management. Optimal timing of penile fracture repair remains to be elucidated with data limited by low incidence, resulting in small case series and a lack of randomized controlled trials. Nonetheless, recent data suggest that a brief delay in surgical intervention for patients presenting with penile fractures does not affect long-term sexual and functional outcomes.