Citations

Abstract Introduction Penile dysmorphophobia is common, with up to 20% of men reporting dissatisfaction with their genital size. The global market for Sexual Enhancement Supplements is estimated at $300 Million in the year 2020 and is projected to reach $608 Million by 2027 in the US alone. Evidence for efficacy is minimal, and purported claims are hyperbolic. Objective We sought to assess penile elongation internet offerings, quantify cost, ingredients, and risk and investigate scientific literature of product ingredients when available. Methods Three online marketplaces (Amazon, Google market, and Walmart) were queried for dietary supplements available without a prescription to improve penile size. Product labels were reviewed to compile penile size-related claims and active ingredients. The one-course (60-day) cost of treatment and consumer star rating were assessed. MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were queried with labeled ingredients to assess the scientific evidence from published and lay sources. Results A total of 84 dietary supplements claimed either increased penile length, girth, enhanced sexual performance, or a combination thereof. Of these 84 products, 90 ingredients were listed. The Mean 60-day cost was $52 (range of $12–$222). The median score by consumers in the markets with a possibility of star rating was 3.5 (range 2.4-4.2) with obvious repetitive and self-promotional tactics. Unsurprisingly, no scientific evidence supporting change in penile size was found for any products in our search. Actual described physiologic activity from active ingredients included were described as antidepressant, lipid and glucose lowering/metabolizing, blood pressure effecting, anti-inflammatory, renally protective, cognitive function effecting, antioxidant, and several ingredients weakly enhancing erectile activity. Renal failure, warnings against long-term use, heart problems, neuropathy, blood pressure effects, fertility toxicity, bleeding, liver disease, and numerous interactions with diabetes, blood thinning, immunosuppressant, and PDE5 medications were found for the ingredients. Conclusions Dietary supplements claiming to enhance penile size contained ingredients with conflicting or no scientific evidence to support their claims. Several ingredients were dangerous. Clinician awareness of these sham “solutions” and their continued mass consumption highlight the magnitude of misinformation, unrealistic expectations, shame, and enhancement desperation regarding penile size in the male public psyche. Disclosure No

Significance Statement Antibiotics modify human microbiomes and may contribute to kidney stone risk. In a population-based case-control study using 1247 chart-validated first-time symptomatic kidney stone formers and 4024 age- and sex-matched controls, the risk of kidney stones was transiently higher during the first year after antibiotic use. However, this risk was no longer evident after adjustment for comorbidities and excluding participants with prior urinary symptoms. Findings were consistent across antibiotic classes and the number of antibiotic courses received. This suggests that antibiotics are not important risk factors of kidney stones. Rather, kidney stones when they initially cause urinary symptoms are under-recognized, resulting in antibiotic use before a formal diagnosis of kidney stones ( i.e. , reverse causality). Background Antibiotics modify gastrointestinal and urinary microbiomes, which may contribute to kidney stone formation. This study examined whether an increased risk of a first-time symptomatic kidney stone episode follows antibiotic use. Methods A population-based case-control study surveyed 1247 chart-validated first-time symptomatic kidney stone formers with a documented obstructing or passed stone (cases) in Olmsted County, Minnesota, from 2008 to 2013 and 4024 age- and sex-matched controls. All prescriptions for outpatient oral antibiotic use within 5 years before the onset of symptomatic stone for the cases and their matched controls were identified. Conditional logistic regression estimated the odds ratio (OR) of a first-time symptomatic kidney stone across time after antibiotic use. Analyses were also performed after excluding cases and controls with prior urinary tract infection or hematuria because urinary symptoms resulting in antibiotic prescription could have been warranted because of undiagnosed kidney stones. Results The risk of a symptomatic kidney stone was only increased during the 1-year period after antibiotic use (unadjusted OR, 1.31; P = 0.001), and this risk was attenuated after adjustment for comorbidities (OR, 1.16; P = 0.08). After excluding cases and controls with prior urinary symptoms, there was no increased risk of a symptomatic kidney stone during the 1-year period after antibiotic use (unadjusted OR, 1.04; P = 0.70). Findings were consistent across antibiotic classes and the number of antibiotic courses received. Conclusions The increased risk of a first-time symptomatic kidney stone with antibiotic use seems largely due to both comorbidities and prescription of antibiotics for urinary symptoms. Under-recognition of kidney stones that initially cause urinary symptoms resulting in antibiotic use may explain much of the perceived stone risk with antibiotics ( i.e. , reverse causality).

Objectives To compare the carbon footprint and environmental impact of single‐use and reusable flexible cystoscopes. Materials and Methods We analysed the expected clinical lifecycle of single‐use (Ambu aScope™ 4 Cysto) and reusable (Olympus CYF‐V2) flexible cystoscopes, from manufacture to disposal. Performance data on cumulative procedures between repairs and before decommissioning were derived from a high‐volume multispecialty practice. We estimated carbon expenditures per‐case using published data on endoscope manufacturing, energy consumption during transportation and reprocessing, and solid waste disposal. Results A fleet of 16 reusable cystoscopes in service for up to 135 months averaged 207 cases between repairs and 3920 cases per lifecycle. Based on a manufacturing carbon footprint of 11.49 kg CO 2 /kg device for reusable flexible endoscopes and 8.54 kg CO 2 /kg device for single‐use endoscopes, the per‐case manufacturing cost was 1.37 kg CO 2 for single‐use devices and 0.0017 kg CO 2 for reusable devices. The solid mass of single‐use and reusable devices was 0.16 and 0.57 kg, respectively. For reusable devices, the energy consumption of reusable device reprocessing using an automated endoscope reprocessor was 0.20 kg CO 2 , and per‐case costs of device repackaging and repair were 0.005 and 0.02 kg CO 2 , respectively. The total estimated per‐case carbon footprint of single‐use and reusable devices was 2.40 and 0.53 kg CO 2 , respectively, favouring reusable devices. Conclusion In this lifecycle analysis, the environmental impact of reusable flexible cystoscopes is markedly less than single‐use cystoscopes. The primary contributor to the per‐case carbon cost of reusable devices is energy consumption of reprocessing.