Outcomes of simultaneous placement of an inflatable penile prosthesis and a male urethral sling through a single perineal incision

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

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.

Simultaneous implant of inflatable penile prosthesis and artificial urinary sphincter: a single high-volume center experience

Erectile dysfunction and stress urinary incontinence are both an important sequel after local therapy for prostate cancer, such as radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy. The implant of an inflatable penile prosthesis or an artificial urinary sphincter is an option if other treatments fail in both cases. There is a lack of literature regarding a simultaneous dual implantation. The aim of this study is to describe per- and postoperative morbidity and functional results. We included 25 patients operated between January 2018 and August 2022. Data were collected retrospectively. Standardized questionnaires for evaluating satisfaction were administered. There was a median operative time of 45 min (IQR 41.25-58). No intra-operative complications were seen. Four patients needed revision surgery, all of them regarding the sphincter prosthesis. One of these patients had additional revision surgery due to leakage of the penile implant reservoir. There were no infectious complications. There was a median follow-up time of 29 months (IQR 9.5-43). There was a satisfaction rate of 88% with patients and 92% with partners. Postoperative pads per day were reduced to zero or one in 96% of patients. We conclude that the dual implantation of an inflatable penile prosthesis and an artificial urinary sphincter was a safe and effective treatment in our series for patients with conservative treatment-refractory stress urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction.

Synchronous Surgical Management of Erectile Dysfunction and Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Reoperation Rates

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy, safety, and postoperative outcomes of synchronous surgery for concomitant erectile dysfunction (ED) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI) remain unclear.

OBJECTIVES

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the available synchronous surgical approaches for concomitant ED and SUI and to assess the reoperation rates compared to asynchronous surgery and surgery only for ED or SUI.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases until June 2022 for relevant studies. Based on data availability, we performed a meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs) comparing reoperation rates after synchronous surgery in patients with concomitant ED and SUI versus asynchronous surgery, as well as surgery solely for ED or SUI (PROSPERO: CRD42022326941).

RESULTS

We included 18 studies in the systematic review (16,517 patients) and 5 in the meta-analysis. Comparing synchronous implantation of penile prosthesis and artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) versus asynchronous surgery, no statistically significant differences were observed in the reoperation rates [OR:0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.52-1.84, I²:0%). Comparing synchronous implantation of both penile prosthesis and AUS versus implantation of only a penile prosthesis or an AUS, combined surgery was associated with higher reoperation rates (OR:2.02, 95%CI: 1.29-3.16, I²:36% and OR:1.7, 95%CI: 1.25-2.32, I²:0%, respectively). Synchronous surgery led to high satisfaction rates and significant improvement in ED and SUI. Evidence for the combination of penile prosthesis with a male sling or the ProACT device is low, but data suggests it may be safe and effective. The synchronous placement of a Mini-Jupette sling and penile prosthesis represents a promising treatment modality for the correction of ED and mild SUI and/or climacturia.

CONCLUSIONS

Synchronous penile prosthesis and AUS implantation appears safe and effective in patients with severe ED and SUI. Further high-quality studies are mandatory to strengthen the current scarce evidence for synchronous surgery in patients with ED and SUI. Pyrgidis N, Barham DW, Hammad M, et al. Synchronous Surgical Management of Erectile Dysfunction and Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Reoperation Rates. Sex Med Rev 2022;XX:XXX-XXX.

The International Penile Prosthesis Implant Consensus Forum: clinical recommendations and surgical principles on the inflatable 3-piece penile prosthesis implant

Despite significant scientific advances in the modern three-piece inflatable penile prosthesis implant surgery, it is not without surgical risks and can carry additional cosmetic and psychosocial consequences in poorly selected and consented individuals. To address this problem, an international group of key opinion leaders and high-volume prosthetic surgeons reviewed the current guidelines and clinical evidence, discussed their experiences, and formed a consensus regarding inflatable penile prosthesis surgery. The findings of this consensus panel were presented at the 17th biennial Asia Pacific Society of Sexual Medicine scientific meeting. The experts concluded that proper patient selection, informed consent and strict adherence to safe surgical principles are important to optimize clinical outcomes. Furthermore, most intraoperative complications, if recognized, can be addressed intraoperatively to enable placement of the device at the time of initial surgery. Men with significant corporal fibrosis due to Peyronie's disease, prior prosthesis explantation and priapism, and men who have undergone construction of a neophallus, as well as men who receive concurrent continence surgery, are complex cases requiring additional care and advanced techniques to obtain optimal surgical outcomes. Variability in patient care - in terms of postoperative antibiotic use, pain management, scrotal care, and cycling of the penile prosthesis implant - must be reduced to enable optimization and assessment of outcomes across patient groups.

Practical Considerations in Inflatable Penile Implant Surgery

BACKGROUND

Penile prosthesis implantation remains an effective solution for men with medical-refractory erectile dysfunction (ED) following radical pelvic surgery. Despite the distortion of pelvic anatomy, a penile implant can be performed with excellent clinical outcomes provided strict patient selection, proper preoperative workup and safe surgical principles are adhered to.

AIM

To provide practical recommendations on inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) implantation in patients with medical-refractory ED, with an emphasis on patient selection and counselling, preoperative workup as well as surgical considerations to minimize intraoperative complications.

METHODS

A Medline search on relevant English-only articles on penile prostheses and pelvic surgery was undertaken and the following terms were included in the search for articles of interest: "bladder cancer", "prostate cancer", "rectal cancer", "pelvic surgery" and "inflatable penile implant".

OUTCOMES

Clinical key recommendations on patient selection, preoperative workup and surgical principles.

RESULTS

Patients should be made aware of the mechanics of IPP and the informed consent process should outline the benefits and disadvantages of IPP surgery, alternative treatment options, cost, potential prosthetic complications and patient's expectations on clinical outcomes. Specialised diagnostic test for workup for ED is often not necessary although preoperative workup should include screening for active infection and optimising pre-existing medical comorbidities. Precautionary measures should be carried out to minimise infective complication. Corporal dilation and reservoir placement can be challenging in this group, and surgeons may require knowledge of advanced reconstructive surgical techniques when dealing with specific cases such as coexisting Peyronie's disease and continence issue.

CLINICAL TRANSLATION

Strict patient selection and counselling process coupled with safe surgical principles are important to achieve excellent linical outcomes and patient satisfaction rates.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

This masterclass paper provides an overview of the practical considerations for men who are undergoing IPP surgery following radical pelvic surgery. Limitations include the lack of highquality data and detailed surgical description on each surgical troubleshooting steps for various prosthetic-related complications.

CONCLUSION

The IPP implantation can be performed efficiently and safely in patients following radical pelvic surgery. Chung E, Mulhall J. Practical Considerations in Inflatable Penile Implant Surgery. J Sex Med 2021;18:1320-1327.

Narrative review of male urethral sling for post-prostatectomy stress incontinence: sling type, patient selection, and clinical applications

Male stress urinary incontinence (SUI) following prostate treatment is a devastating complaint for many patients. While the artificial urinary sphincter is the gold standard treatment for male SUI, the urethral sling is also popular due to ease of placement, lack of mechanical complexity, and absence of manual dexterity requirement. A literature review was performed of male urethral sling articles spanning the last zz20 years using the PubMed search engine. Clinical practice guidelines were also reviewed for comparison. Four categories of male urethral sling were evaluated: the transobturator AdVance and AdVance XP, the bone-anchored InVance, the quadratic Virtue, and the adjustable sling series. Well selected patients with mild to moderate urinary incontinence and no prior history of radiation experienced the highest success rates at long-term follow up. Patients with post-prostatectomy climacturia also reported improvement in leakage after sling. Concurrent penile prosthesis and sling techniques were reviewed, with favorable short-term outcomes demonstrated. Male urethral sling is a user-friendly surgical procedure with durable long-term outcomes in carefully selected men with mild stress urinary incontinence. Multiple sling types are available with varying degrees of efficacy and complication rates. Longer follow-up and larger cohort sizes are needed for treatment of newer indications such as climacturia as well as techniques involving dual placement of sling and penile prosthesis.

Penile prosthesis implant in the special populations: diabetics, neurogenic conditions, fibrotic cases, concurrent urinary continence surgery, and salvage implants

Penile prosthesis implant (PPI) remains an effective and safe treatment option for men with erectile dysfunction (ED). However, PPI surgery can be associated with a higher risk of complications in certain populations. This article provides a critical review of relevant publications pertaining to PPI in men with diabetes, significant corporal fibrosis, spinal cord injury, concurrent continence surgery, and complex salvage cases. The discussion of each category of special populations includes a brief review of the surgical challenges and a practical action-based set of recommendations. While specific patient populations posed considerable challenges in PPI surgery, strict pre- and postoperative management coupled with safe surgical practice is a prerequisite to achieving excellent clinical outcomes and high patient satisfaction rate.

Comparing Risk Factors for Adverse Outcomes in Virgin Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Implantations and Revisions: A Retrospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Recent studies place the risk of infection following inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP) implantation at 1-2%. This risk may be underestimated due to the exclusion of high-risk patients, such as patients undergoing multiple revisions or revision following IPP infection, from data.

AIM

To calculate the rate of postoperative complications for all patients undergoing IPP implantation and revision, and to determine the risk factors predictive of complications following virgin implantation and revision independently.

METHODS

The charts of 280 patients undergoing 331 IPP implantations performed over the last 20 years at a large academic medical center were reviewed for postoperative complications and suspected preoperative and operative risk factors.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

This included the prevalence of adverse operative outcomes including postoperative infection and device malfunction.

RESULTS

63 (20.7%) surgeries resulted in postoperative complications: 38 (12.5%) resulting in device malfunction and 25 (8.20%) resulting in infection. Smoking (odds ratio [OR] = 4.14, P = .00) was associated with overall postoperative complications. Within subgroups, concomitant procedures (OR = 4.77, P = .03) were associated with infection for those undergoing virgin implantation, but not those undergoing revision procedures. Alternatively, diabetes mellitus (DM) (OR = 28.3, P = .02) was associated with postoperative infection for those undergoing revision procedures, but not those undergoing virgin implantation.

CONCLUSION

The rate of postoperative infection for all patients undergoing IPP was found to be 8.20%, a higher estimate than historically recorded. To varying degrees, smoking, concomitant procedures, and DM were associated with adverse operative outcomes. Subset analyses revealed significant associations between postoperative infections and either concomitant procedures or DM in those undergoing virgin implantations or revision surgeries, respectively. Miller JA, Bennett NE. Comparing Risk Factors for Adverse Outcomes in Virgin Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Implantations and Revisions: A Retrospective Cohort Study. J Sex Med 2020;8:388-395.

Concurrent Penile Prosthesis and Artificial Urinary Sphincter versus Penile Prosthesis and Male Sling: A National Multi-Institutional Analysis of National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database Comparing Postoperative Morbidity

Purpose

We aimed to assess the 30-day morbidity in patients undergoing combined insertion of penile prosthesis (PP) and artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) vs. PP and male sling (MS).

Materials and Methods

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried to identify patients who underwent placement of AUS or MS combined with PP. Patient demographics, postoperative morbidity including complications, readmission and reoperation rates were recorded. Student t-test and chi-square or Fischer's exact test were used as appropriate.

Results

Forty-one patients met selection criteria between 2010 and 2016. Overall, 26 patients received PP and AUS vs. 15 that received PP and MS. Average age was similar in both groups (64.8±6.6 years vs. 62.3±6.3 years, p=0.254). Diabetes mellitus was more prevalent in PP+MS group compared to AUS+PP group (46.7% vs. 11.5%, p=0.022). Average length of stay was higher in PP+AUS group compared to PP+MS group (2.2±0.6 days vs. 1.8±0.4 days, p=0.017). Postoperative morbidity was reported in four patients in PP+AUS group. No reported complications in PP+MS group. In PP+AUS group, complications included one patient who developed urinary tract infection, one developed surgical site infection, readmission in two for postoperative infection, and one return to the operating room. No reported prosthesis explantation or revision in either groups.

Conclusions

Our results showed that 30-day morbidity was recorded in the PP+AUS group and none in the PP+MS group. The complication and readmission rates remain comparable to the previous reports in both groups.

Synchronous surgery for the combined treatment of post-radical prostatectomy erectile dysfunction and stress urinary incontinence: a lucrative evolution or an unnecessary complexity?

Aim of this review is to summarize and evaluate the current literature addressing the synchronous combined surgical treatment approach for co-existent post-radical prostatectomy erectile dysfunction and stress urinary incontinence. Severity of stress urinary incontinence is the basic element that defines which option of combined surgery will be offered to a patient. So, for cases of severe erectile dysfunction and severe stress urinary incontinence (>4 pads/day) the only available option is synchronous inflatable penile prosthesis plus artificial urinary sphincter dual implantation. When severe erectile dysfunction coexist with mild to moderate stress urinary incontinence synchronous inflatable penile prosthesis plus male sling or ProAct (Uromedica, Plymouth, MN, USA) device are the current available treatment options. Finally, when severe erectile dysfunction along with mild stress urinary incontinence and with or without climacturia are present, a new surgical technique of simultaneous inflatable penile prosthesis plus urethral mini-sling, named "Andrianne mini-jupette", implantation has been recently proposed. Synchronous combined surgery for post-radical prostatectomy erectile dysfunction and stress urinary incontinence seems to offer similar efficacy and safety results compared with two-stage implantation but in a more cost- and time effective approach. Thus, synchronous surgery, in the hands of experienced prosthetic surgeons, could be potentially a valuable alternative for the management of co-existent post-radical prostatectomy erectile dysfunction and stress urinary incontinence. Nevertheless, in order to acquire robust scientific data further prospective comparative studies on larger numbers of patients are surely needed.

Management of Climacturia During Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Surgery

Radical prostatectomy, the preferred treatment option for organ-confined prostate cancer, is associated with a wide variety of sexual dysfunctions including erectile and orgasmic dysfunctions. Climacturia is a type of orgasmic dysfunction that has been reported to occur in 20-60% of men after radical prostatectomy. Several treatment strategies for climacturia have been evaluated and recommended including behavioral changes, use of special devices, medications, specialized therapies, and surgeries. Inflatable penile prosthesis implantation might be the treatment of choice when conservative management approaches fail to treat erectile dysfunction. In this review article, the different options and approaches for the management of climacturia during inflatable penile prosthesis surgery will be discussed.

Combined Implantation of a Penile Prosthesis and Adjustable Continence Therapy ProACT in Patients with Erectile Dysfunction and Urinary Incontinence after Radical Prostatectomy: Results of a Prospective Pilot Study

INTRODUCTION

The treatment of postradical prostatectomy erectile dysfunction (post-RP-ED) and stress urinary incontinence (post-RP-SUI) may require the combined implantation of a penile prosthesis and incontinence surgery. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding which incontinence surgery should be associated with a penile implant.

AIMS

To evaluate the combined implantation of a penile prosthesis and the adjustable continence therapy ProACT in patients with post-RP-ED and post-RP-SUI.

METHODS

We implanted the ProACT device and a penile prosthesis synchronously (n = 6) and asynchronously (n = 4) in 10 patients with moderate post-RP-SUI and severe post-RP-ED. We evaluated the effects on urinary incontinence using the ICIQ and PGI-I scores and pad use. We evaluated the effect on sexual function using the EHS and Global Assessment Questionnaire (GAQ), and we evaluated satisfaction with the penile prosthesis on a 5-point scale. Postoperative pain associated with each procedure was evaluated by a numeric rating scale.

RESULTS

No cases of urinary retention or prosthesis infection were observed. Postoperative pain was mainly related to penile prosthesis implantation. After a mean follow-up of 22.7 ± 20.9 months (range: 6-53), significant improvements of the ICIQ score (15.3 ± 3.7 vs. 4.7 ± 2.3, P < 0.001) and pad use per day (2.8 ± 1.2 vs. 0.3 ± 0.5, P < 0.001) were observed compared with baseline. According to the PGI-I questionnaire, eight patients described a very much improved (n = 6) or much improved (n = 2) urinary condition. All patients declared an EHS = 4 with the use of penile prosthesis; all patients were very satisfied (n = 6) or satisfied (n = 4) with their penile prosthesis. All patients answered the GAQ positively.

CONCLUSION

The combined implantation of a Pro-ACT device and penile prosthesis represents a feasible therapeutic option in patients with post-RP-SUI and post-RP-ED. The absence of postoperative pain associated with the ProACT procedure may represent the main interest in this therapy.

Simultaneous penile prosthesis and male sling/artificial urinary sphincter

Erectile dysfunction (ED) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI) from urethral sphincteric deficiency is not an uncommon problem. The commonest etiology is intervention for localized prostate cancer and/or radical cystoprostatectomy for muscle invasive bladder cancer. Despite advances in surgical technology with robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy and nerve sparing techniques, the rates of ED and SUI remain relatively unchanged. They both impact greatly on quality of life domains and have been associated with poor performance outcomes. Both the artificial urinary sphincter and penile prosthesis are gold standard treatments with proven efficacy, satisfaction and durability for end-stage SUI and ED respectively. Simultaneous prosthesis implantation for concurrent conditions has been well described, mostly in small retrospective series. The uptake of combination surgery has been slow due in part to technical demands of the surgery and to an extent, a heightened anxiety over potential complications. This paper aims to discuss the technical aspect of concurrent surgery for both disease entity and the current published outcomes of the various surgical techniques with this approach.

Streamlined approach for infrapubic placement of an inflatable penile prosthesis

The streamlined approach for infrapubic placement of an inflatable penile prosthesis is a variation of the traditional infrapubic approach. A better understanding of operative techniques and recent clinical outcome studies have led to an evolution of the original infrapubic approach. Small incisions and efficient operative maneuvers can shorten operative times and expedite postoperative recovery.

Inflatable penile prostheses: an update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Since the advent of oral medication for the treatment of erectile dysfunction the disease has garnered increasing attention by both scientists and the general public alike. Coinciding with this, more patients are seeking treatment of their disease. When medical management is not successful, surgical implantation of a penile prosthesis may be considered.

RECENT FINDINGS

Because inflatable penile prostheses are vastly preferred by patients over noninflatable prostheses, this review will focus on their current use, reported durability and safety, and patient satisfaction.

SUMMARY

Inflatable penile prostheses are associated with decreasing risks of infection and device malfunction and extremely high patient and partner satisfaction rates. Because of this, inflatable penile prostheses remain a viable tertiary treatment option for erectile dysfunction.

[Asynchronous implantation of a penile prosthesis (AMS 700) in patients with an artificial urinary sphincter (AMS 800): what functional outcomes can we expect from the AMS 1500?]

OBJECTIVE

To report the functional results and morbidity after metachronous implantation of an AMS 800 artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) and an AMS 700 inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From the 250 patients treated in our department between 2000 and 2011 for the insertion of an AUS, we retrospectively selected patients who also underwent implantation of an IPP. The following data were recorded: age, aetiology of urinary incontinence (UI) and erectile dysfunction (ED), treatment history of UI/ED, date of insertion of the AUS and the IPP and time gap between the two implants. We evaluated both the pad-test and the number of protective pads used per day, before and after AUS insertion. We also analysed the IIEF5 score before and after IPP. Patients were reviewed at 3, 6 and 12 months and annually thereafter.

RESULTS

In total, five patients were included. The median age was 69 years. The median follow-up after IPP was 22.6 months and the time gap between the two implants was 50 months. The aetiology of UI and ED was prostate surgery in four cases. Complete continence without leakage was observed in three patients and the IIEF5 score increased from 6.6 preoperatively to 22.2 for four patients. One patient developed a urethral erosion of the AUS cuff 6 months after implantation of the IPP. The AUS cuff has been explanted but the patient remains continent with the IPP cylinders semi-inflated.

CONCLUSION

From our small study, it appears that the combined use of an AMS 800 AUS and an AMS 700 IPP was a feasible and efficacious option in patients with concomitant refractory UI and ED.