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 50 条
  • [21] SAFETY PROFILE OF COUNTER INCISION FOR RESERVOIR PLACEMENT DURING INFLATABLE PENILE PROSTHESIS SURGERY
    Grimberg, Dominic
    Nose, Brent
    Carlos, Evan
    Harper, Shelby
    Lentz, Aaron
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2020, 203 : E452 - E452
  • [22] SAME-DAY INFLATABLE PENILE PROSTHESIS PLACEMENT: COMPARABLE OUTCOMES AND COMPLICATION RATES
    Zell, M.
    Wolter, C.
    JOURNAL OF SEXUAL MEDICINE, 2019, 16 (04): : S101 - S102
  • [23] GLANS PENIS SENSITIVITY TO VIBRATION AFTER INFLATABLE PENILE PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION USING A PENOSCROTAL AND INFRAPUBIC APPROACH
    Akhvlediani, Nika
    Enikeev, Dmitry
    Butnaru, Denis
    Matukhov, Igor
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 199 (04): : E423 - E423
  • [24] Outcomes of Simultaneous Placement of an Inflatable Penile Prosthesis and a Male Urethral Sling Through a Single Perineal Incision Comment
    Seftel, Allen
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2010, 183 (04): : 1495 - 1495
  • [25] SINGLE SURGEON EXPERIENCE WITH RESERVOIR PLACEMENT DURING PENOSCROTAL INFLATABLE PENILE IMPLANT SURGERY, IS A COUNTER INCISION NECESSARY
    Gheiler, E.
    JOURNAL OF SEXUAL MEDICINE, 2024, 21
  • [26] 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
  • [27] 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
  • [28] RESERVOIR INDUCED BLADDER RUPTURE: A RARE COMPLICATION OF INFLATABLE PENILE PROSTHESIS REVISION SURGERY
    Phelps, J.
    Trussell, J.
    JOURNAL OF SEXUAL MEDICINE, 2020, 17 (01): : S86 - S86
  • [29] 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
  • [30] Re: Penoscrotal versus Minimally Invasive Infrapubic Approach for Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Placement: A Single-Center Matched-Pair Analysis
    Morey, Allen F.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 201 (05): : 852 - 852