Complication rates in concurrent inflatable penile prosthesis and incontinence surgery: Comparing the penoscrotal versus perineal incision approach

被引:1
|
作者
Blum, Kyle A. [1 ,2 ]
Mehr, Justin P. [1 ]
Green, Travis P. [1 ,2 ]
Macharia, Kirema [1 ]
Kim, Daniel [1 ]
Westney, O. Lenaine [2 ]
Wang, Run [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Texas Houston, McGovern Med Sch, Dept Surg, Div Urol, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[2] Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Urol, Houston, TX 77030 USA
关键词
ARTIFICIAL URINARY SPHINCTER; ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION; DUAL IMPLANTATION; RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; MANAGEMENT; SATISFACTION; PLACEMENT;
D O I
10.1038/s41443-022-00628-7
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
The main objective of this study was to assess the IPP complication rates of patients undergoing placement via perineal incision versus more traditional penoscrotal approach in synchronous dual implantation. We identified 38 patients who underwent dual implantations of an IPP and AUS or urethral sling from 2011 to 2021 at a single tertiary center, 24 via perineal and 14 via penoscrotal incision. All IPP implants were done by a single surgeon. IPP postoperative complications were captured using the Clavien-Dindo classification at three separate time points, < 30 days, 30 days - 6 months, and > 6 months. The perineal group had two complications, IPP explantation due to rectourethral fistula (Grade III, > 6 months), and IPP explantation due to chronic genital pain (Grade III, > 6 months). The penoscrotal group had three complications, post-operative urinary retention requiring catheterization (Grade I, < 30 days), incision site infection (Grade I, < 30 days), and IPP explantation due to infection (Grade III, 30 days to < 6 months). There was no statistically significant difference in rate of patients with IPP complications between the two groups (p = 0.546) or in rate of IPP device malfunction (p = 0.264). These preliminary findings suggest that the single perineal incision is a viable surgical approach in synchronous dual implantation.
引用
收藏
页码:89 / 93
页数:5
相关论文
共 18 条
  • [1] Penoscrotal approach for inflatable penile prosthesis implant: why it should be preferred
    Ricapito, Anna
    Sedigh, Omid
    Rubino, Matteo
    Gobbo, Andrea
    Falagario, Ugo G.
    Annese, Pasquale
    Mancini, Vito
    Ferro, Matteo
    Buffi, Nicolo
    Cormio, Luigi
    Carrieri, Giuseppe
    Busetto, Gian Maria
    Bettocchi, Carlo
    MINERVA UROLOGY AND NEPHROLOGY, 2023, 75 (06): : 711 - 717
  • [2] The penoscrotal surgical approach for inflatable penile prosthesis placement
    Gupta, Nikhil K.
    Ring, Josh
    Trost, Landon
    Wilson, Steven K.
    Koehler, Tobias S.
    TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY, 2017, 6 (04) : 628 - 638
  • [3] Penile prosthesis surgery: Indications and penoscrotal approach
    Vendeira, P.
    ACTAS UROLOGICAS ESPANOLAS, 2020, 44 (05): : 377 - 381
  • [4] Outcomes of Simultaneous Placement of an Inflatable Penile Prosthesis and a Male Urethral Sling through a Single Perineal Incision
    Gorbatiy, Vladislav
    Westney, Ouida Lenaine
    Romero, Claudio
    Wang, Run
    JOURNAL OF SEXUAL MEDICINE, 2010, 7 (02) : 832 - 838
  • [5] Reservoir induced bladder rupture: a complication of inflatable penile prosthesis revision surgery
    Schardein, Jessica N.
    Trussell, J. C.
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2021, 28 (06) : 10946 - 10952
  • [6] Impact of Surgeon Case Volume on Reoperation Rates after Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Surgery
    Onyeji, Ifeanyi C.
    Sui, Wilson
    Pagano, Mathew J.
    Weinberg, Aaron C.
    James, Maxwell B.
    Theofanides, Marissa C.
    Stember, Doron S.
    Anderson, Christopher B.
    Stahl, Peter J.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2017, 197 (01) : 223 - 228
  • [7] Penoscrotal versus minimally invasive infrapubic approach for inflatable penile prosthesis placement: a single-center matched-pair analysis
    Grande, Pietro
    Antonini, Gabriele
    Cristini, Cristiano
    De Berardinis, Ettore
    Gatto, Antonio
    Di Lascio, Giovanni
    Lemma, Andrea
    Gentile, Giuseppe
    Di Pierro, Giovanni Battista
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 36 (07) : 1167 - 1174
  • [8] Penoscrotal versus minimally invasive infrapubic approach for inflatable penile prosthesis placement: a single-center matched-pair analysis
    Pietro Grande
    Gabriele Antonini
    Cristiano Cristini
    Ettore De Berardinis
    Antonio Gatto
    Giovanni Di Lascio
    Andrea Lemma
    Giuseppe Gentile
    Giovanni Battista Di Pierro
    World Journal of Urology, 2018, 36 : 1167 - 1174
  • [9] An approach to the thoughtful selection of antimicrobial prophylaxis for inflatable penile prosthesis surgery
    Barham, David W.
    Simhan, Jay
    Yafi, Faysal A.
    Gross, Martin S.
    JOURNAL OF SEXUAL MEDICINE, 2023, 20 (09) : 1140 - 1142
  • [10] Revisiting the penoscrotal approach to artificial urinary sphincter surgery: how does it compare to a perineal incision for initial implantation?
    Staniorski, Christopher J.
    Singal, Ashima
    Nettey, Oluwarotimi
    Yura, Emily
    Keeter, Mary Kate
    Kielb, Stephanie
    Hofer, Matthias D.
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2021, 39 (03) : 871 - 876