ORIGINAL RESEARCH—SURGERY: Anatomical Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy in Patients with a Preexisting Three-Piece Inflatable Prosthesis: A Series of Case Reports

Sexual satisfaction in prostate cancer: a multi-group comparison study of treated patients, patients under active surveillance, patients with negative biopsy, and controls

PURPOSE

Erectile function changes after prostate cancer (PCa) treatment are well documented, but less understood is the relative impact of prostate biopsy and active surveillance on sexual well-being. It is unknown whether potential negative impacts are exclusive to patients who have been treated for PCa, or whether the diagnosis itself or the experience of biopsy may also impact sexual well-being. Sexual satisfaction is an important yet understudied indicator of sexual well-being in this population. This study examines sexual satisfaction and its predictors across several comparison groups to explore relative impact.

METHODS

At baseline and 12 months, questionnaire data was collected in four samples: (1) following PCa treatment, (2) active surveillance, (3) negative prostate biopsy result, and (4) controls receiving no biopsy or treatment. Predictors assessed included group, erectile function, communication style, and partner involvement.

RESULTS

Sexual satisfaction declined in the active treatment group, no changes were observed in active surveillance or non-PCa control, and improvements were observed in the biopsy group. Predictors of sexual satisfaction over and above erectile function included restrictive communication (i.e. protective buffering) and perceived partner involvement. For higher levels of erectile function, a higher perceived degree of partner involvement was protective of sexual satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Sexual satisfaction is an important indicator of sexual well-being and is negatively impacted following PCa treatment, but not active surveillance or prostate biopsy.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Communication and partner involvement are potentially modifiable factors to be considered for intervention and may promote sexual satisfaction following PCa treatment. Patients experiencing negative biopsy, who note lower sexual satisfaction may experience improved satisfaction with time, and those under active surveillance who worry about sexual satisfaction may find reassurance from these results.

Iatrogenic injuries to reservoirs of inflatable penile prosthesis during urologic surgery: a scoping review and case report

INTRODUCTION

First-line treatment options for patients with erectile dysfunction whose medical management has failed include the inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP). Many patients with an IPP require subsequent urologic surgery, during which the reservoir of the IPP can be injured.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to present a summary of current literature related to iatrogenic injuries to the IPP sustained during urologic surgery.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently performed a systematic search on PubMed using standardized search terms to identify pertinent articles. After preliminary review, relevant studies were analyzed to identify the presence of perioperative complications resulting in IPP reservoir injury. Results were categorized by surgical procedures.

RESULTS

Among 13 articles included, all were based on urologic surgery. Four studies identified IPP reservoir injury as a result of surgical injury. Of these, injuries occurred during radical prostatectomy (n = 3) and prostatic urethral lift surgery (UroLift, n = 1). Most radical prostatectomy studies without IPP reservoir injuries also described intentional surgical techniques that were employed to prevent reservoir damage, including modulation of reservoir inflation-deflation (n = 3), temporary reservoir repositioning (n = 1), or reservoir capsule dissection to improve visualization (n = 1). Findings from an additional novel case report on IPP injury during a UroLift procedure are presented in this review.

CONCLUSION

Approximately one-third of studies identified intraoperative IPP reservoir injury as a significant complication of urologic surgery, particularly during radical prostatectomy. Novel case report findings also contribute the only other case of IPP reservoir damage sustained from delivery of UroLift implants. Findings are used to create a standardized surgical checklist that guides perioperative planning measures prior to pursuing surgery in adjacent spaces.

Management of urologic prosthetic reservoirs at the time of inguinal or pelvic surgery

INTRODUCTION

The artificial urinary sphincter and 3-piece inflatable penile prosthesis each require a fluid storage component and thus have components in the inguinal and pelvic regions. Because of this, patients with urologic prosthetics sometimes present challenges during future nonprosthetic operations. Presently, there is no established guideline for device management with ensuing inguinal or pelvic surgery.

AIMS

This article outlines concerns during pelvic and inguinal surgery for patients with an artificial urinary sphincter and/or inflatable penile prosthesis and proposes an algorithm for preoperative surgical planning and decision making.

METHODS

We conducted a narrative review of the literature on operative management of these prosthetic devices. Publications were identified by searching electronic databases. Only peer-reviewed publications available in English were considered for this review.

RESULTS

We review the important considerations as well as available options for operative management of these prosthetic devices during subsequent nonprosthetic surgery and highlight the advantages and disadvantages of each. Finally, we suggest a framework for helping surgeons determine which management strategy is most appropriate for their individual patients.

CONCLUSION

The best management strategy will differ depending on patient values, the planned surgery, and patient-specific factors. Surgeons should understand and counsel patients on all available options and encourage informed, shared decision making to determine the best individualized approach.

Radical cystectomy and orthotopic neobladder in a patient with a preexisting three-components inflatable penile prosthesis

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

As erectile dysfunction is more commonly being diagnosed and treated with a preexisting inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) insertion at younger ages, surgeons will increasingly encounter pre-placed abdominal reservoirs when performing pelvic surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 69-year-old Caucasian man with BCG refractory carcinoma-in-situ (CIS) and past history of non-invasive high-grade urothelial carcinoma of the bladder was a candidate for a radical cystectomy and an ileal-neobladder diversion. He had a three-components IPP inserted for the treatment of Peyronie disease and organic erectile dysfunction (ED). During the radical cystectomy the reservoir was encapsulated on the left lateral pelvic wall over the external iliac vessels. It was isolated and IPP was inflated to reduce the reservoir size. After accurate disinfection, the reservoir was removed from Retzius space without disconnecting it from the pump. Then, the radical cystectomy was carried out without any intraoperative complications and Studer ileal orthotopic neobladder was performed. At the end of the surgery, the reservoir was disinfected with the Mulcahy protocol and then placed in the same position.

RESULTS

A week after catheter removal the IPP was successfully activated. The patient's postoperative recovery was uneventful and no postoperative complication occurred. Definitive histological examination described a multifocal urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: pG3Tis N0 R0. The patient reports excellent functionality of the penile prosthesis and is currently using it.

CONCLUSIONS

Sexual functionality preservation in oncologic patients should be pursued when possible. In this report, the functionality of the IPP was preserved, while still performing oncologically radical procedures. A multicenter study is needed to assure more solid recommendations on this rare procedure that is surely burdened by a lot of risks.

Prevention and management of postprostatectomy sexual dysfunctions part 2: recovery and preservation of erectile function, sexual desire, and orgasmic function

CONTEXT

Sexual dysfunction is common in patients who undergo radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCa).

OBJECTIVE

Review the available literature concerning prevention of, and management strategies for, post-RP sexual dysfunction in terms of postoperative treatments for erectile function (EF), sexual desire (SD), and orgasmic function (OF) impairment.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature search was performed using Google and PubMed databases for English language original and review articles either published or e-published up to November 2011.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We propose a rational description of many of the clinically available preventive and therapeutic strategies for the preservation and recovery of post-RP EF. A huge amount of preclinical data show that tissue damage ultimately leads to structural alterations, and the literature stresses that rehabilitation and treatment are undoubtedly better than leaving the erectile tissue to its unassisted fate; likewise, the timing of any rehabilitation and treatment is of major clinical importance. However, no specific recommendation emerges regarding the structure of the optimal rehabilitation or treatment regimen. The role of postoperative erectile dysfunction (ED) treatment of those patients who received a non-nerve-sparing RP was also extensively discussed. The literature almost completely lacks a systematic and comprehensive debate about SD (ie, low libido) and OF (ie, decreased intensity of orgasm, dysorgasmia, and climacturia) in patients undergoing RP. Psychological and sexual counseling is of major importance to improve any rehabilitation and treatment of postoperative EF, SD, and OF impairment.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the great number of possible rehabilitation approaches proposed, these approaches should be considered only as strategies, since incontrovertible evidence of their effectiveness for improving natural EF recovery is limited. Conversely, numerous effective therapeutic options are available for treating post-RP ED. SD and OF have not yet been fully assessed in patients who underwent RP.